PDA

View Full Version : PSD's Official #15 NBA Player of All Time



JordansBulls
07-26-2011, 04:02 PM
RULES:
There will be a zero tolerance, one strike policy. If ANY poster is interrupting any of the threads in a negative way, OR causing any problems they're ability to vote will be taken away.
NO POSTING in your FORUM, VOTE for this GUY. We had problems last time with it and NO POSTING in someone Else's Forum to VOTE for a certain player.


Criteria: Take into account both peak and career play, era dominance, impact on the game of basketball, and how well their style of play and skills would transcend onto different eras. To be more exact, how great they were at playing the game of basketball.


Voting for #14 has concluded and PSD's Official #14 NBA Player of all time is....

Karl Malone


Top 5 Voters


Karl Malone = 46 votes
Julius Erving = 20 votes
Charles Barkley = 13 votes
David Robinson = 11 votes
Lebron James = 7 votes


The List:
The List Thread (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=635088)

The List:
1. Michael Jordan (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=631361)
2. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=631585)
3. Wilt Chamberlain (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=632046)
4. Magic Johnson (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=632690)
5. Bill Russell (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=632852)
6. Larry Bird (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=633428)
7. Shaquille O'neal (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=633751)
8. Kobe Bryant (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=634022)
9. Hakeem Olajuwon (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=634733)
10. Tim Duncan (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=635092)
11. Oscar Robertson (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=635506)
12. Moses Malone (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=636033)
13. Jerry West (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=636552)
14. Karl Malone (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=636998)


Voting will now begin for the #15 NBA Player All Time


NOTE: We will start the nomination process again. You can only nominate one player and that player had to be an allstar multiple times at least probably at least 3 times at a minimum. The player who has the most nomination votes will be added to the next poll. Anyone who nominates more than one player there nomination will be disregarded.

Chacarron
07-26-2011, 04:07 PM
The Chuckster.

B'sCeltsPatsSox
07-26-2011, 04:13 PM
I have no idea of who to pick here.

GoPacers33
07-26-2011, 04:16 PM
Dr j

ILMindState
07-26-2011, 04:20 PM
Gotta give Mikan some love. You can't measure his stats but he was a pioneer and revolutionized the game.

Rule changes
Mikan became so dominant that the NBA had to change its rules of play in order to reduce his influence such as widening the lane from six to twelve feet ("The Mikan Rule"). He also played a role in the introduction of the shot clock, and in the NCAA his dominating play around the basket led to the outlawing of defensive goaltending. Mikan set the stage for the Modern Age of the NBA dominated by tall, powerful players.[1][2]
As an official, Mikan is also directly responsible for the ABA three-point line, which was later adapted by the NBA, the multi-colored ABA ball, which still lives on as the "money ball" in the NBA All-Star Three Point Shootout,[11] and the existence of the Minnesota Timberwolves.[1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Mikan

Ebbs
07-26-2011, 04:25 PM
Just got damn hard

PatsSoxKnicks
07-26-2011, 04:26 PM
I have no idea of who to pick here.

David Robinson. He had a prime that rivaled Shaq, won a DPOY, led the league in DRtg 5 times, served in the Navy (yeah, I know not basketball related but thats got to be a plus right? lol), has won 2 championships, 1 in which he played a vital role (Twin towers), and really changed the culture of the Spurs franchise. Before that, they were pretty irrelevant.

I would go him or Chuck but DRob was the much better defender. Even though his postseason numbers dipped, much like with KG, his defense presumably didn't. If you want to look at some of the numbers, you can see the prime numbers/career/playoff broken down here (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showpost.php?p=18595784&postcount=34)

naps
07-26-2011, 04:40 PM
Bob Pettit is very very underrated on PSD. I am pretty sure most people here don't even know his resume.

NYKalltheway
07-26-2011, 04:42 PM
I am puzzled over this, went by pure luck and gone for Mikan :p
Between Dr J, Mikan, Petit and Havlicek, Robinson & Barkley my next guys

ManRam
07-26-2011, 05:08 PM
Went with Robinson, and feel very confident about that.

PatsSoxKnicks
07-26-2011, 05:20 PM
Bob Pettit is very very underrated on PSD. I am pretty sure most people here don't even know his resume.

Yeah, he deserves to be in consideration too.

As far as Mikan, he was a pioneer and changed the game but he also dominated much inferior competition. 6-10 guy who dominated people much shorter. In addition, he only played 7 years. The last year he didn't even play a full season. His domination really came in his first 3 years, and then after that, he was great for the next 2 years, good for 1 year and basically irrelevant in his last year. I'm not sure that someone who dominated for so short and didn't have a long career deserves to be ahead of some of these other guys. Sure he changed the game but his longevity isn't there. To give people an idea, his career is as long as Lebron's has been so far.

Khalifa21
07-26-2011, 05:45 PM
Went with Robinson, and feel very confident about that.

Agreed.

1x MVP
1x ROY
1x DPOY
2x NBA Champion
10x All-Star
10x All-NBA Team (4x 1st team, 2x 2nd team, 4x 3rd team)
8x All-NBA Defensive Team (4x 1st team, 4x 2nd team)

21 and 11 with 3 assists and 3 blocks a game for his career. One of only two players to lead the league in scoring, rebounding and blocks at some point in his career (the other being Kareem Abdul-Jabbar).

One of only two players to win DPOY and lead the league in scoring (along with Jordan), showing his two way dominance.

Top 7 in MVP award shares in first 8 years in the NBA.

Led the league 5 times in defensive rating and is 6th all-time in defensive rating (95.6).

2nd all-time in WS/48 with 0.250, only behind Jordan.

That's an impressive enough resumé for me to have him here.

AntiG
07-26-2011, 05:45 PM
Clyde Drexler is also very unappreciated on this board. The guy was basically the second best swingman in the entire league after Jordan for years and led a team of mediocre talents (that made for great role players) to two finals before finally being paired with another superstar to win it all. It was pretty clear-cut how good he really was when he was added onto the Dream Team in 1992 and was (along with Barkley) the best player throughout the Olympics. The guy was as good as you get offensively, with a combination of incredible driving ability, above average three point and jump shooter, excellent defender and a very good passer.

Khalifa21
07-26-2011, 05:52 PM
Yeah, he deserves to be in consideration too.

As far as Mikan, he was a pioneer and changed the game but he also dominated much inferior competition. 6-10 guy who dominated people much shorter. In addition, he only played 7 years. The last year he didn't even play a full season. His domination really came in his first 3 years, and then after that, he was great for the next 2 years, good for 1 year and basically irrelevant in his last year. I'm not sure that someone who dominated for so short and didn't have a long career deserves to be ahead of some of these other guys. Sure he changed the game but his longevity isn't there. To give people an idea, his career is as long as Lebron's has been so far.

This is why I have a lot of guys ahead of Mikan. He played in a league with 10 teams and dominated guys that were 6'5 and unathletic. The guy was undoubtebly the first 'superstar' of the NBA but with only 440 career games to his name and only three years of real dominance i'm struggling to justify having him above guys like Barkley, Dr. J, Isiah, Stockton etc.

NYKalltheway
07-26-2011, 05:56 PM
Clyde Drexler is also very unappreciated on this board. The guy was basically the second best swingman in the entire league after Jordan for years and led a team of mediocre talents (that made for great role players) to two finals before finally being paired with another superstar to win it all. It was pretty clear-cut how good he really was when he was added onto the Dream Team in 1992 and was (along with Barkley) the best player throughout the Olympics. The guy was as good as you get offensively, with a combination of incredible driving ability, above average three point and jump shooter, excellent defender and a very good passer.

there's absolutely no love for Drexler here. I've been saying that the guy is as good as or better than Kobe(which imo should be considered a basketball fact) and I was laughed by all the kobephiles :eyebrow:

Drexler and Gervin are top 5 SGs in NBA history imo after Michael Jordan and Jerry West and John Havlicek(I consider him SG since he was 6ft5 and you could argue that Boston played with 3 guards back then, rather than the stereotype SG-SF combo)

Swashcuff
07-26-2011, 06:05 PM
David Robinson. He had a prime that rivaled Shaq, won a DPOY, led the league in DRtg 5 times, served in the Navy (yeah, I know not basketball related but thats got to be a plus right? lol), has won 2 championships, 1 in which he played a vital role (Twin towers), and really changed the culture of the Spurs franchise. Before that, they were pretty irrelevant.

I would go him or Chuck but DRob was the much better defender. Even though his postseason numbers dipped, much like with KG, his defense presumably didn't. If you want to look at some of the numbers, you can see the prime numbers/career/playoff broken down here (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showpost.php?p=18595784&postcount=34)


Agreed.

1x MVP
1x ROY
1x DPOY
2x NBA Champion
10x All-Star
10x All-NBA Team (4x 1st team, 2x 2nd team, 4x 3rd team)
8x All-NBA Defensive Team (4x 1st team, 4x 2nd team)

21 and 11 with 3 assists and 3 blocks a game for his career. One of only two players to lead the league in scoring, rebounding and blocks at some point in his career (the other being Kareem Abdul-Jabbar).

One of only two players to win DPOY and lead the league in scoring (along with Jordan), showing his two way dominance.

Top 7 in MVP award shares in first 8 years in the NBA.

Led the league 5 times in defensive rating and is 6th all-time in defensive rating (95.6).

2nd all-time in WS/48 with 0.250, only behind Jordan.

That's an impressive enough resumé for me to have him here.

Thanks for leaving me with nothing else to say guys. Darn I can't stand you Knicks fans. :p

D.Rob here for me too as well.

gmckenziejr82
07-26-2011, 08:57 PM
I went with Robinson here. His prime is strong and right up there, if not better than some members already on this list. Even without the rings he is deserving of this spot. His numbers tailed off at the end of his career but that is due to age and the spurs drafting Duncan.

MTar786
07-26-2011, 09:59 PM
i went with d rob. im oing with kg next followed by mikan

tredigs
07-26-2011, 10:00 PM
D. Rob's a fine choice, but let's not forget that this guy was infamous for going ghost in critical moments of the playoffs throughout the entirety of his career; some of those games versus Hakeem when they were both prime were painful to watch as a supporter of the Admiral. Hard to blame him, but it did illuminate that despite the incredible numbers, he wasn't the same class of center as Shaq/'Dream.

I'm taking Pettit here. Going back to your post about inflated PER/WS numbers from the 60's PatSoxKnicks, I'm not sure that's the case at all. What would have been inflated due to pace (scoring and rebounding - although assists are given MUCH easier in modern basketball than they were in the past) are conversely deflated due to not having steals or blocks accounted for.

For example, in the 4 consecutive years Pettit led the league in PER - he never eclipsed 28.2, and averaged ~27 in that stretch, 25.3 for his career. Anyway, to summarize my (already summarized) post from the last thread - we're talking about a guy who was top 5 in the league in WinShares/PER virtually his entire career, is top ten all time in points per game (at an efficient rate for his day - top 10 in TS% half his career), 3rd all time in rebounds per game (and as a PF - to answer your question PatSoxKnicks - center in college, moved to a low-block forward in the NBA), All-NBA the first 10 years of his career (alongside Wilt, Russell, Jerry West and Big O), 2nd Team his final year, an All-Star every season (record 4 All-Star game MVP's), multiple MVP winner, played/beat a prime/MVP Bill Russel and the Celtics (not many can claim that), and was just an all around beast of a player.

Incredibly underrated and often overlooked due to the dominance of Wilt and Bill during that era, but Pettit very easily makes his case for this slot. He's my vote from last slot going forward. Mikan was a transcendent talent and brought the "big" to the NBA, but just realize that he was playing in a league that did not feature any talented players over 6'7". It was a man among boys - Pettit was easily the better player, playing in a tough NBA.

Raps18-19 Champ
07-26-2011, 10:31 PM
I love how Barkley isn't getting any votes after those uneducated voters who got told for voting for him in the top 10.

tredigs
07-26-2011, 11:01 PM
Just checked the current results - looks like Robinson might be the one to take this one. Very interesting choice, though admittedly defensible - I think I could make a very strong case for Lebron over him, really. Rare to see Robinson ever crack an All-Time top 20 on anybody's list.

Raps18-19 Champ
07-26-2011, 11:08 PM
Just checked the current results - looks like Robinson might be the one to take this one. Very interesting choice, though admittedly defensible - I think I could make a very strong case for Lebron over him, really. Rare to see Robinson ever crack an All-Time top 20 on anybody's list.

Top 20's from analyst usually include players before the 70's.

People in this forum have no clue of those people before the 70's.

NBAfan4life
07-26-2011, 11:13 PM
Just checked the current results - looks like Robinson might be the one to take this one. Very interesting choice, though admittedly defensible - I think I could make a very strong case for Lebron over him, really. Rare to see Robinson ever crack an All-Time top 20 on anybody's list.

If it is any consolation you and Petitt's numbers have made a strong case for him going forward for me.

pd7631
07-26-2011, 11:23 PM
This one came down to Pettit and Dr. J for me. Ultimately I went with the Doctor because he was going up against Bird and Magic year in and year out and the overall competition level in the 80's was flat out better than in Pettit's time. Dr. J is also one of the most iconic figures in NBA history.

mightybosstone
07-26-2011, 11:31 PM
I realize Robinson statically is more impressive, but Erving was more important to the league and accomplished a little more over his career. He's so important to the style of basketball that they play today, that I feel like he deserves a top 15 spot over someone like Robinson, who was never really the dominant player of his era, was certainly not a dominant postseason player, but has an awful lot of pretty numbers to back up his argument.

mightybosstone
07-26-2011, 11:38 PM
As for all you Mikan fanatics out there, I don't think he deserves to sniff top 20. The dude only played for 10 years and he played in the infancy of the league and it's hard for me to take the NBA pre-1960s very seriously. Guys like Bob Pettit, John Havlicek and Elgin Baylor deserve a look before Mikan, IMO, as they played in a more competitive league as the NBA was just becoming popular. Hell, Mikan played the majority of his career without a freakin' shot clock. How exactly are we supposed to take that seriously?

Raps18-19 Champ
07-26-2011, 11:46 PM
As for all you Mikan fanatics out there, I don't think he deserves to sniff top 20. The dude only played for 10 years and he played in the infancy of the league and it's hard for me to take the NBA pre-1960s very seriously. Guys like Bob Pettit, John Havlicek and Elgin Baylor deserve a look before Mikan, IMO, as they played in a more competitive league as the NBA was just becoming popular. Hell, Mikan played the majority of his career without a freakin' shot clock. How exactly are we supposed to take that seriously?

Thank you.

He impacted the game culturally.

But his game doesn't sound like top 20 top me.

tredigs
07-27-2011, 12:12 AM
As for all you Mikan fanatics out there, I don't think he deserves to sniff top 20. The dude only played for 10 years and he played in the infancy of the league and it's hard for me to take the NBA pre-1960s very seriously. Guys like Bob Pettit, John Havlicek and Elgin Baylor deserve a look before Mikan, IMO, as they played in a more competitive league as the NBA was just becoming popular. Hell, Mikan played the majority of his career without a freakin' shot clock. How exactly are we supposed to take that seriously?

Only 7 years (wasn't even the "NBA" yet in his rookie year) and I agree. He was transcendent and brought both an incredible running hook (both ways) and introduced the very NOTION that a 6'10" guy could be coordinated enough to dominate in the league (and no taking away his dominance of those guys - by all accounts and the videos we can see he killed it), but I don't think he stacks up well with the players of the next generation going forward.

Lakersfan2483
07-27-2011, 01:27 AM
Hard to go against Petit at this juncture, however I am going to go with Sir Charles Barkley.

PatsSoxKnicks
07-27-2011, 02:48 AM
D. Rob's a fine choice, but let's not forget that this guy was infamous for going ghost in critical moments of the playoffs throughout the entirety of his career; some of those games versus Hakeem when they were both prime were painful to watch as a supporter of the Admiral. Hard to blame him, but it did illuminate that despite the incredible numbers, he wasn't the same class of center as Shaq/'Dream.

He was famous for that. And I suppose even his defense was poor against Hakeem, although I was watching some of one of the games and from what I saw (which was a brief amount, haven't finished the game yet), he wasn't that bad defensively.

Still, I would think that for the majority of his career in the postseason, he still maintained a high level of defense, even if his offense faded.



I'm taking Pettit here. Going back to your post about inflated PER/WS numbers from the 60's PatSoxKnicks, I'm not sure that's the case at all. What would have been inflated due to pace (scoring and rebounding - although assists are given MUCH easier in modern basketball than they were in the past) are conversely deflated due to not having steals or blocks accounted for.

That's true. The only reason I was wondering about that is because a lot of these all-time greats seem to have pretty high PER/WS totals in the 60s. Wilt's numbers are off the charts. Oscar's got one of the best primes (4th in WS/PER I think) and of course Kareem's first and best 4 years came in that time period before they started keeping track of blocks, steals, etc. Obviously, all are great players and it was probably baseless to speculate that they have inflated stats based on so few players. Maybe I'm still just trying to figure out why Oscar's peak ranks ahead of every player not named MJ, Wilt or Kareem which in turn made me question whether the numbers were inflated.

Also, if I'm not mistaken turnovers weren't accounted for many of those years, which could then help inflate totals. Chronz could probably give a good answer on this.




For example, in the 4 consecutive years Pettit led the league in PER - he never eclipsed 28.2, and averaged ~27 in that stretch, 25.3 for his career. Anyway, to summarize my (already summarized) post from the last thread - we're talking about a guy who was top 5 in the league in WinShares/PER virtually his entire career, is top ten all time in points per game (at an efficient rate for his day - top 10 in TS% half his career), 3rd all time in rebounds per game (and as a PF - to answer your question PatSoxKnicks - center in college, moved to a low-block forward in the NBA), All-NBA the first 10 years of his career (alongside Wilt, Russell, Jerry West and Big O), 2nd Team his final year, an All-Star every season (record 4 All-Star game MVP's), multiple MVP winner, played/beat a prime/MVP Bill Russel and the Celtics (not many can claim that), and was just an all around beast of a player.

Incredibly underrated and often overlooked due to the dominance of Wilt and Bill during that era, but Pettit very easily makes his case for this slot. He's my vote from last slot going forward. Mikan was a transcendent talent and brought the "big" to the NBA, but just realize that he was playing in a league that did not feature any talented players over 6'7". It was a man among boys - Pettit was easily the better player, playing in a tough NBA.

A very compelling argument for Pettit. And thanks for the info on the position.

LAKERMANIA
07-27-2011, 03:20 AM
David Robinson is better than Pettit and Mikan?

BlitzBlud4
07-27-2011, 03:36 AM
David Robinson is better than Pettit and Mikan?

Yup, Id say so. Based on on overall dominance and longevity.

chong2204
07-27-2011, 03:58 AM
Went with Sir CB34....Dude was a beast, and tore up my Sonics back in the day....

NYKalltheway
07-27-2011, 04:24 AM
I should have gone for Dr J :p

I find it really really weird (in a bad way) that Kobe got #8 while Havlicek is getting no love even at #15. Pathetic really.

Chronz
07-27-2011, 04:43 AM
I realize Robinson statically is more impressive, but Erving was more important to the league and accomplished a little more over his career. He's so important to the style of basketball that they play today, that I feel like he deserves a top 15 spot over someone like Robinson, who was never really the dominant player of his era, was certainly not a dominant postseason player, but has an awful lot of pretty numbers to back up his argument.
So you want us to give Julius extra credit for being the first of his kind.


As for all you Mikan fanatics out there, I don't think he deserves to sniff top 20. The dude only played for 10 years and he played in the infancy of the league and it's hard for me to take the NBA pre-1960s very seriously. Guys like Bob Pettit, John Havlicek and Elgin Baylor deserve a look before Mikan, IMO, as they played in a more competitive league as the NBA was just becoming popular. Hell, Mikan played the majority of his career without a freakin' shot clock. How exactly are we supposed to take that seriously?
So you want us to punish Mikan for being the first of his kind?

LakersIn5
07-27-2011, 04:43 AM
talent and skill wise lebron is the best available so im gonna go with him

GREATNESS ONE
07-27-2011, 04:51 AM
I should have gone for Dr J :p

I find it really really weird (in a bad way) that Kobe got #8 while Havlicek is getting no love even at #15. Pathetic really.

Kobe would beat every player on that board 1 vs 1

GREATNESS ONE
07-27-2011, 05:00 AM
Top 20's from analyst usually include players before the 70's.

People in this forum have no clue of those people before the 70's.

Correct.


This one came down to Pettit and Dr. J for me. Ultimately I went with the Doctor because he was going up against Bird and Magic year in and year out and the overall competition level in the 80's was flat out better than in Pettit's time. Dr. J is also one of the most iconic figures in NBA history.

Dr. J is great definitely was a toss up for me, he should land soon.


As for all you Mikan fanatics out there, I don't think he deserves to sniff top 20. The dude only played for 10 years and he played in the infancy of the league and it's hard for me to take the NBA pre-1960s very seriously. Guys like Bob Pettit, John Havlicek and Elgin Baylor deserve a look before Mikan, IMO, as they played in a more competitive league as the NBA was just becoming popular. Hell, Mikan played the majority of his career without a freakin' shot clock. How exactly are we supposed to take that seriously?

Absolutely right but the man played what was laid before him we shouldn't judge him harshly because he played in a minimized and less talented league. It's just always hard to place players with so many throughout time and how the game as evolved over the years.

Thank you.

He impacted the game culturally.

But his game doesn't sound like top 20 top me.

:)

Only 7 years (wasn't even the "NBA" yet in his rookie year) and I agree. He was transcendent and brought both an incredible running hook (both ways) and introduced the very NOTION that a 6'10" guy could be coordinated enough to dominate in the league (and no taking away his dominance of those guys - by all accounts and the videos we can see he killed it), but I don't think he stacks up well with the players of the next generation going forward.


You're 100% correct. That's why it's so difficult placing players who all played in different Era's.

NYKalltheway
07-27-2011, 06:46 AM
Kobe would beat every player on that board 1 vs 1

Havlicek is the top white scorer in the NBA, has numerous championships. Kobe got voted not because he dominated, but because of 5 rings (and is a current player so he has fans). I think my point was quite obvious

alencp3
07-27-2011, 07:57 AM
Kobe would beat every player on that board 1 vs 1

dr j would rape him 1on1

gmckenziejr82
07-27-2011, 08:17 AM
A couple days ago I had a revelation. At what point do the players from the earlier eras lose there legendary status. I understand the criteria for ranking the players on this list but where most of the older players fail is transcending onto different eras. Some people argue that Robinsons stats look inflated. If that were so, what would that say for the players in his time? I mean many have already made the list. If any numbers are inflated I would say it is the players from the earlier eras. I try to find a way to accept the older players from the past but just don't think they match the skill of the players over the last couple of decades. I did vote for some of these older players on the list, but only the ones that I feel could make an impact in any era. I have been watching a lot of hardwood classics on nba tv so I would give it a fair shot and i just don't see it. I also hear a lot of posters speaking about how no one knows anything about the older players. If you are not 50 or 60 plus, you didn't see any of these older players play the game so you to can only go by stats and old footage. Just had to put that out there. Once again I do also understand that the criteria says dominance in their era so don't think I am just ranting because im mad. I just feel like at some point we have to let some of the older guys go

Testaverde16
07-27-2011, 08:36 AM
Dr J here

gsgs49
07-27-2011, 10:55 AM
I read this today,based on WAR(Wins Above Replacement) David Robinson in 1994 had the second best PEAK regular season since 1978 just behind Michael Jordan in 1988.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=9840

He was unreal that year,he averaged 29.8 points,10.7 rebounds,4.8 assists,3.3 blocks and 1.7 steals with a PER of 30.7 and a WS/48 of 0.296.
He led his team to 55 wins and his cast was below average,he had only two good players in Dennis Rodman and Dale Ellis.

tredigs
07-27-2011, 12:09 PM
I read this today,based on WAR(Wins Above Replacement) David Robinson in 1994 had the second best PEAK regular season since 1978 just behind Michael Jordan in 1988.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=9840

He was unreal that year,he averaged 29.8 points,10.7 rebounds,4.8 assists,3.3 blocks and 1.7 steals with a PER of 30.7 and a WS/48 of 0.296.
He led his team to 55 wins and his cast was below average,he had only two good players in Dennis Rodman and Dale Ellis.

Without yet clicking on the list I was certain it would be MJ dominated and include at least of Lebron's seasons, maybe three. Bingo. Realistically, David Robinson has virtually no argument over Lebron in the All-Time rankings. People think Lebron has disappeared big in certain playoff situations? It wasn't that D. Rob didn't show up, he was simply overmatched far too often. But yes, had some amazing regular seasons - that one in particular. Jordan with 6 of the top 10 on that list, and only got better in the playoffs... absurd.

Bears mentioning that this was only from 1978 forward, by the way. Still holding my Pettit choice very strong imo.

Nice find. edit: no clue why that frown face is there.

todu82
07-27-2011, 12:53 PM
This is where these polls get tough, I went with Dr.J here.

PatsSoxKnicks
07-27-2011, 02:57 PM
Without yet clicking on the list I was certain it would be MJ dominated and include at least of Lebron's seasons, maybe three. Bingo. Realistically, David Robinson has virtually no argument over Lebron in the All-Time rankings. People think Lebron has disappeared big in certain playoff situations? It wasn't that D. Rob didn't show up, he was simply overmatched far too often. But yes, had some amazing regular seasons - that one in particular. Jordan with 6 of the top 10 on that list, and only got better in the playoffs... absurd.

Bears mentioning that this was only from 1978 forward, by the way. Still holding my Pettit choice very strong imo.

Nice find. edit: no clue why that frown face is there.

Honestly, Lebron's prime is better then everyones with the exception of MJ, Wilt and maybe Kareem. But at some point, you have to ask, has the player played enough seasons? If you'd rank Lebron over DRob, you'd have to consider Lebron at a lot higher then here.

tredigs
07-27-2011, 03:28 PM
Honestly, Lebron's prime is better then everyones with the exception of MJ, Wilt and maybe Kareem. But at some point, you have to ask, has the player played enough seasons? If you'd rank Lebron over DRob, you'd have to consider Lebron at a lot higher then here.

Eh I don't think so. Virtually everyone ahead has MVPs, a ring as a #1 (very least #2), was top 3 at their position and/or has fundamentally changed the game. Gotta get back to work, but I'll take a closer look later tonight.

PatsSoxKnicks
07-27-2011, 07:06 PM
Eh I don't think so. Virtually everyone ahead has MVPs, a ring as a #1 (very least #2), was top 3 at their position and/or has fundamentally changed the game. Gotta get back to work, but I'll take a closer look later tonight.

From a peak standpoint, his numbers are superior to almost everyones (plus he does have 2 MVPs and has been the best player for years):

Win Shares:


best 5 consecutive years
Wilt 105.5
Kareem 101.8
MJ 98.0
Oscar 88.7
Lebron 84.0
Drob 82.9


EWA:


best 5 consecutive years
Wilt 182.10
MJ 164.56
Lebron 142.27
Kareem 139.43
Pettit 134.30
Drob 132.22


His peak is really up there. However, as I said before, I don't think he's played enough seasons yet to be considered anywhere around this point. IMO, he needs at least 10 seasons.

But if you're going on peak alone, he's got a great case ahead of a lot of guys.

MTar786
07-27-2011, 07:57 PM
dr j would rape him 1on1

julius?? is that you??

MTar786
07-27-2011, 08:21 PM
From a peak standpoint, his numbers are superior to almost everyones (plus he does have 2 MVPs and has been the best player for years):

Win Shares:


best 5 consecutive years
Wilt 105.5
Kareem 101.8
MJ 98.0
Oscar 88.7
Lebron 84.0
Drob 82.9


EWA:


best 5 consecutive years
Wilt 182.10
MJ 164.56
Lebron 142.27
Kareem 139.43
Pettit 134.30
Drob 132.22


His peak is really up there. However, as I said before, I don't think he's played enough seasons yet to be considered anywhere around this point. IMO, he needs at least 10 seasons.

But if you're going on peak alone, he's got a great case ahead of a lot of guys.

peak stats doesnt really mean much for lebrons case or a lot of other players in history for me. Maybe to people who dont know basketball.. but to people that do will realize lebron had inflated stats because he was the only option for the last 7 years. Its all about what cards you are dealt. jordan was in a system where he has CLEARLY the number one option on offense.. and the number two player on offense was slightly used as an offensive weapon.. and even when he was it was THROUGH jordan.. being allowed to take as many shots as you like WITH that kind of quality on your team (best rebounder and defender in the league/top 2 second option in the league) is a great recipe for optimum individual performnce AND a shot at a ring.
ofcourse jordan was the best ever too lol


when kobe had adapted into being the only option his numbers were incredible. give him 7 seasons straight of that and people would be saying kobe had the best peak of all time bar none.. (but that wouldnt be true) only to the eyes of people who dont really know the game of basketball.
lebrons stats this year followed by his next 5 years with the heat should be a better more true test of his performence.
I dont consider kobes **** teams seasons as much as i consider his 30/7/6 season with 9 straight 40 plus games at the age of 24 WITH shaq (another 30ppg guy ON a championship contending team)
or his 29/6/5 with 85ft% at the age of 22 ON a CHAMPIONSHIP team with another 30ppg scorer.

i dont consider lebrons **** teams.. i consider his 27/7/7 on 51%fg on a championship contending team with another 25ppg guy and a 16ppg guy

this isnt a knock on any players.. its just my philosophy on how 'peaks' can be sometimes misleading
point is.
by the books you would think 2010 lebron was better than 2011. but to me 2011 lebron was better excluding his atrocious signture finals play

tredigs
07-27-2011, 09:14 PM
In the same breath that you're downplaying his numbers on Cleveland, you'd sure have to consider his numbers on the Heat a shell of what they could be on a team like San Antonio or Dallas (only bringing up top seeds, forget the lesser teams). He plays alongside a guy who had near-dominant offensive numbers in Toronto as a #1 option, and another in D. Wade who's a top 3 player in the league and was THE NBA leader in USG% the past two years (and actually slightly edged Lebron in USG% this year as well). Very few players in NBA history have played alongside two prime offensive powers (specifically Wade) - for him to still put up the numbers he did is pretty intense.

Swashcuff
07-27-2011, 09:27 PM
peak stats doesnt really mean much for lebrons case or a lot of other players in history for me. Maybe to people who dont know basketball.. but to people that do will realize lebron had inflated stats because he was the only option for the last 7 years. Its all about what cards you are dealt. jordan was in a system where he has CLEARLY the number one option on offense.. and the number two player on offense was slightly used as an offensive weapon.. and even when he was it was THROUGH jordan.. being allowed to take as many shots as you like WITH that kind of quality on your team (best rebounder and defender in the league/top 2 second option in the league) is a great recipe for optimum individual performnce AND a shot at a ring.
ofcourse jordan was the best ever too lol


when kobe had adapted into being the only option his numbers were incredible. give him 7 seasons straight of that and people would be saying kobe had the best peak of all time bar none.. (but that wouldnt be true) only to the eyes of people who dont really know the game of basketball.
lebrons stats this year followed by his next 5 years with the heat should be a better more true test of his performence.
I dont consider kobes **** teams seasons as much as i consider his 30/7/6 season with 9 straight 40 plus games at the age of 24 WITH shaq (another 30ppg guy ON a championship contending team)
or his 29/6/5 with 85ft% at the age of 22 ON a CHAMPIONSHIP team with another 30ppg scorer.

i dont consider lebrons **** teams.. i consider his 27/7/7 on 51%fg on a championship contending team with another 25ppg guy and a 16ppg guy

this isnt a knock on any players.. its just my philosophy on how 'peaks' can be sometimes misleading
point is.
by the books you would think 2010 lebron was better than 2011. but to me 2011 lebron was better excluding his atrocious signture finals play

You do realize that Kobe's peak was not as good as you make it out to be right?

It's arguable that Wade and McGrady had better peaks.

Also you do realize that good teammates actually help you more than it hurts you. Having a player like Shaq allowed Kobe to do many things that he would not have been able to had he played with say Zyrundas Illgauskas instead. No knock on Kobe but good teammates impact good players in a very big way. He didn't do what he did in spite of Shaq but rather Shaq was a big part of the reason why a 24 year old Kobe could have done what he did.

MTar786
07-27-2011, 10:52 PM
You do realize that Kobe's peak was not as good as you make it out to be right?

It's arguable that Wade and McGrady had better peaks.

Also you do realize that good teammates actually help you more than it hurts you. Having a player like Shaq allowed Kobe to do many things that he would not have been able to had he played with say Zyrundas Illgauskas instead. No knock on Kobe but good teammates impact good players in a very big way. He didn't do what he did in spite of Shaq but rather Shaq was a big part of the reason why a 24 year old Kobe could have done what he did.

i must be missing something here? lol you think its arguable that tmac and wade were better than a prime kobe??? i dont think thats even arguable. and yes, having a shaq type player on your team is going to take away from fga and points. maybe ur apg will go up and maybe fg%. but not points. use your brain. there is only one ball on the court. why did lebrons ppg average go down this season einstein?

also, u say shaq impacted kobe in such a way?
and that big players impact other big player (Hinting that they inflate their stats for them)
so tell me, by your logic kobe should have better stats then he did in 06 and 07 right? infact kobes number were even better before pau came and went down during the second half of the 08 season With pau.. coincidence? explain that for me too.

why did lebrons stats go down? ofcourse his fg% went up as it should. but less shots, less time with the ball will result to less statistical point factors. That is what im trying to get to you.
kobe had to deal with that from day 1. he had 3 and a half seasons like that too and those stats seem to be his best numbers (which im trying to tell you are inflated due to less star power and being on a crap team)

so basically, either ur mind set is very flawed or you are just an ignorant hater.

now, if you learnt how to watch basketball and see for your self and not be a nerd and look at stats all day.. you would see how ******** it is for you to say that wade and tmac are comparable to kobe in his prime.

phlp_bj
07-27-2011, 10:56 PM
gotta go with the admiral here

Swashcuff
07-27-2011, 11:04 PM
i must be missing something here? lol you think its arguable that tmac and wade were better than a prime kobe??? i dont think thats even arguable. and yes, having a shaq type player on your team is going to take away from fga and points. maybe ur apg will go up and maybe fg%. but not points. use your brain. there is only one ball on the court. why did lebrons ppg average go down this season einstein?

Use my brain? You should not be telling me to use my brain when you don't even understand how to gauge a player's worth.

:laugh2:

I said peak not prime.

I would love to see you argue that Kobe's peak season was better than that of Wade's and T-Mac's.

You clearly don't have an understanding of statistics so I shall refrain for engaging in this debate with you.

No matter the FGA or the PPG average what really matters is impact and efficiency. Use your brain. A player such as Shaq relieves you of the stress of leading the team in scoring night in night out, you would then be allowed to focus on other parts of your game. I could explain all the fact to you but you are not worth it.

using points, rebounds, assists and FG% as your measures of a player's worth tells me all I need to know about you.

Swashcuff
07-27-2011, 11:12 PM
also, u say shaq impacted kobe in such a way?
and that big players impact other big player (Hinting that they inflate their stats for them)
so tell me, by your logic kobe should have better stats then he did in 06 and 07 right? infact kobes number were even better before pau came and went down during the second half of the 08 season With pau.. coincidence? explain that for me too.

ur mind set is very flawed

My mind set?

You really don't understand that Shaq was good for Kobe?

You really think a 24 yo developing offensive Kobe would have such great seasons in his younger days with the same efficiency being the lone offensive threat?

And as for Kobe's #s going down when Pau arrived.


Split Value G GS MP FG FGA 3P 3PA FT FTA ORB TRB AST STL BLK TOV PF PTS FG% 3P% FT% MP PTS TRB AST
Pre 52 52 1978 488 1069 92 261 387 457 56 317 276 97 27 176 128 1455 .457 .352 .847 38.0 28.0 6.1 5.3
Post 30 30 1214 287 621 58 154 236 285 38 200 165 54 13 81 99 868 .462 .377 .828 40.5 28.9 6.7 5.5

What? His #s basically improved across the board.

What's your point?

MTar786
07-27-2011, 11:15 PM
Use my brain? You should not be telling me to use my brain when you don't even understand how to gauge a player's worth.

:laugh2:

I said peak not prime.

I would love to see you argue that Kobe's peak season was better than that of Wade's and T-Mac's.

You clearly don't have an understanding of statistics so I shall refrain for engaging in this debate with you.

No matter the FGA or the PPG average what really matters is impact and efficiency. Use your brain. A player such as Shaq relieves you of the stress of leading the team in scoring night in night out, you would then be allowed to focus on other parts of your game. I could explain all the fact to you but you are not worth it.

using points, rebounds, assists and FG% as your measures of a player's worth tells me all I need to know about you.

You're trying to argue my point against me. maybe you dont know how to read but my argument was that stats are inflated when players have to run the team themselves. accept it or not.. but if you dont then you are ignorant. its as clear as day. ANY PLAYER u name it. had wayyyy better stats when they were the only player their team was worth talking about

and id love to see you argue wade and tmacs peak as opposed to kobes.

and good, ur not arguing their primes.. because wade and mac arent on kobes level.

haters will be haters.. n ur def a hater my son

MTar786
07-27-2011, 11:21 PM
My mind set?

You really don't understand that Shaq was good for Kobe?

You really think a 24 yo developing offensive Kobe would have such great seasons in his younger days with the same efficiency being the lone offensive threat?

And as for Kobe's #s going down when Pau arrived.


Split Value G GS MP FG FGA 3P 3PA FT FTA ORB TRB AST STL BLK TOV PF PTS FG% 3P% FT% MP PTS TRB AST
Pre 52 52 1978 488 1069 92 261 387 457 56 317 276 97 27 176 128 1455 .457 .352 .847 38.0 28.0 6.1 5.3
Post 30 30 1214 287 621 58 154 236 285 38 200 165 54 13 81 99 868 .462 .377 .828 40.5 28.9 6.7 5.5

What? His #s basically improved across the board.

What's your point?

im talking about more than 32 games.. im talking about season after season.
i just assumed his stats went a little lower that season based on the fact that it usually happens. are wades numbers better now? or in his crazy 09 season i think? or are lebrons better now? or in his 09 or 10 season?
are tmac stats better in his 02 03 seaosn or in his rockets season? you are fighitn g a losing battle. just use common sense

Swashcuff
07-27-2011, 11:30 PM
You're trying to argue my point against me. maybe you dont know how to read but my argument was that stats are inflated when players have to run the team themselves. accept it or not.. but if you dont then you are ignorant. its as clear as day. ANY PLAYER u name it. had wayyyy better stats when they were the only player their team was worth talking about

and id love to see you argue wade and tmacs peak as opposed to kobes.

and good, ur not arguing their primes.. because wade and mac arent on kobes level.

haters will be haters.. n ur def a hater my son

:laugh2:

A def hater? :laugh:

Kobe's one of my favourite players in the league....

You were the one who spoke of PEAK in your earlier post NOT prime I debated your point. No you're trying to flip it and chastise me for not using prime? :confused:


Rk Player Season Age G MP PER TS% eFG% ORB% DRB% TRB% AST% STL% BLK% TOV% USG% ORtg DRtg OWS DWS WS WS/48
1 Kobe Bryant 2005-06 27 80 3277 28.0 .559 .491 2.6 12.7 7.6 24.1 2.4 0.7 9.0 38.7 114 105 11.6 3.7 15.3 0.224
2 Tracy McGrady 2002-03 23 75 2954 30.3 .564 .505 4.6 14.6 9.5 30.0 2.2 1.5 8.4 35.2 116 104 13.2 2.9 16.1 0.262
3 Dwyane Wade 2008-09 27 79 3048 30.4 .574 .516 3.5 12.2 7.8 40.3 3.0 2.8 11.6 36.2 115 105 10.3 4.4 14.7 0.232

I know however by your posts in this thread that you don't understand advanced metrics nor do care to so this would not mean much to you. However there is a reason why both T-Mac and Wade had a much better PER, TS%, eFG%, WS and WS/48 on a lower usage.

why stop at regular season however?

Playoffs advanced

Rk Player Season Age G MP PER TS% eFG% ORB% DRB% TRB% AST% STL% BLK% TOV% USG% ORtg DRtg OWS DWS WS WS/48
1 Kobe Bryant 2005-06 27 7 314 19.9 .587 .545 1.5 16.9 8.8 21.5 1.3 0.8 16.6 28.9 108 114 0.5 0.1 0.6 0.087
2 Tracy McGrady 2002-03 23 7 308 27.0 .561 .497 3.9 14.1 9.1 26.4 2.5 1.7 11.6 34.9 110 105 0.8 0.3 1.2 0.181
3 Dwyane Wade 2008-09 27 7 285 26.3 .565 .497 1.9 12.8 7.8 31.4 1.2 3.3 12.2 37.2 112 106 0.8 0.4 1.2 0.195

All played in 7 games and both McGrady and Wade out performed Kobe. You don't care about that however.

But you don't really care what those #s say there is no beating 62 in three and 81 in a game right?

Raps18-19 Champ
07-28-2011, 12:41 AM
Kobe would beat every player on that board 1 vs 1

1 person Kobe would really struggle against who isn't there is Scottie.

His defense would be too much for Kobe.

PatsSoxKnicks
07-28-2011, 12:47 AM
You do realize that Kobe's peak was not as good as you make it out to be right?

It's arguable that Wade and McGrady had better peaks.


Depending on how you define peak vs. prime, I've got the numbers. Prime I would probably say is the best 5 consecutive seasons. Peak is either best season or best 3 seasons. As you're aware, in my calculations, I looked at best 3 seasons for peak but perhaps I should look at best season too (something else on my to do list).

Anyways, looking at each of these 3 different ways to evaluate peak and prime, here's the numbers on Kobe, Wade and TMac.

What most would probably consider prime:

Win Shares:


best 5 consecutive seasons
Kobe 64.2
Wade 54.2
Tmac 60.2


EWA (basically PER):


best 5 consecutive seasons
Kobe 112.66
Wade 107.46
Tmac 111.69


Peak:

Win Shares:


best 3 seasons
Kobe 44.0
Wade 42.1
Tmac 40.3


EWA:


best 3 seasons
Kobe 79.47
Wade 79.09
Tmac 72.37


Another measure for basically absolute peak:

Win Shares:


best season
Kobe 15.3
Wade 14.7
Tmac 16.1


EWA:


best season
Kobe 28.53
Wade 30.18
Tmac 29.10


Kobe's prime is better, although I feel like a big part of the reason is Wade basically lost 1 season. If you look at peak for best 3 seasons, Kobe is the best, which I did find surprising. However, looking at individual seasons, Kobe is worse than TMac in both WS and PER and worse than Wade in PER, though better in WS.

Anyways, all 3 are close in terms of peak and even prime. Wade is also still playing in his prime, so I wouldn't be surprised to see him surpass Kobe in that regard. He needs 2 more seasons of 11.9 WS (thereby replacing his 3.3 WS season which really drags down his totals) to surpass Kobe for best 5 consecutive seasons. Certainly doable based on his last 3 seasons. TMac on the other hand, has to settle for being behind Kobe in best 3 seasons and prime but he still has the better individual season.

Also, as an added note, if you use PER or WS/48 instead of the total value type stats like EWA and WS, then Wade has a better peak and TMac's best season is better, not sure about his best 3 seasons though.

From a standpoint of who's better at their best, Wade has Kobe beat in he has 3 seasons where his WS/48 are better than Kobe's. So I could certainly see that argument. Same goes for TMac based on his best season.

MTar786
07-28-2011, 01:06 AM
:laugh2:

A def hater? :laugh:

Kobe's one of my favourite players in the league....

You were the one who spoke of PEAK in your earlier post NOT prime I debated your point. No you're trying to flip it and chastise me for not using prime? :confused:


Rk Player Season Age G MP PER TS% eFG% ORB% DRB% TRB% AST% STL% BLK% TOV% USG% ORtg DRtg OWS DWS WS WS/48
1 Kobe Bryant 2005-06 27 80 3277 28.0 .559 .491 2.6 12.7 7.6 24.1 2.4 0.7 9.0 38.7 114 105 11.6 3.7 15.3 0.224
2 Tracy McGrady 2002-03 23 75 2954 30.3 .564 .505 4.6 14.6 9.5 30.0 2.2 1.5 8.4 35.2 116 104 13.2 2.9 16.1 0.262
3 Dwyane Wade 2008-09 27 79 3048 30.4 .574 .516 3.5 12.2 7.8 40.3 3.0 2.8 11.6 36.2 115 105 10.3 4.4 14.7 0.232

I know however by your posts in this thread that you don't understand advanced metrics nor do care to so this would not mean much to you. However there is a reason why both T-Mac and Wade had a much better PER, TS%, eFG%, WS and WS/48 on a lower usage.

why stop at regular season however?

Playoffs advanced

Rk Player Season Age G MP PER TS% eFG% ORB% DRB% TRB% AST% STL% BLK% TOV% USG% ORtg DRtg OWS DWS WS WS/48
1 Kobe Bryant 2005-06 27 7 314 19.9 .587 .545 1.5 16.9 8.8 21.5 1.3 0.8 16.6 28.9 108 114 0.5 0.1 0.6 0.087
2 Tracy McGrady 2002-03 23 7 308 27.0 .561 .497 3.9 14.1 9.1 26.4 2.5 1.7 11.6 34.9 110 105 0.8 0.3 1.2 0.181
3 Dwyane Wade 2008-09 27 7 285 26.3 .565 .497 1.9 12.8 7.8 31.4 1.2 3.3 12.2 37.2 112 106 0.8 0.4 1.2 0.195

All played in 7 games and both McGrady and Wade out performed Kobe. You don't care about that however.

But you don't really care what those #s say there is no beating 62 in three and 81 in a game right?

i said none of them are at the same level as a PRIME kobe. like i said, you need to learn how to read.
and no, i dont care about advanced stats. look at them play. watch how effective they are on the court with your own eyes. this isnt a computerizd video game. its real.
There is a reason kobe is held in MUCH higher regard than tmac and wade. kobe was both better in prime and his accolades and gameplay prove it.
prime kobe has prime wade beat in every way besides possibly as a slasher.. and that too is arguable.
better shooter, more range, higher iq, better defensively, more clutch etc...
advanced stats or not.. everyone in basketball will tell you that.

i dont even need to argue tmac.

anyway.. u turned this argument into someting else and u are further making a fool of yourself. Look at the last page and you will see what my point was. Read slowly if that helps you

oh and.. You just tried to indicate tmac as a better playoff player than kobe
you deserve a life time of face palms for that

PatsSoxKnicks
07-28-2011, 01:12 AM
i said none of them are at the same level as a PRIME kobe. like i said, you need to learn how to read.
and no, i dont care about advanced stats. look at them play. watch how effective they are on the court with your own eyes. this isnt a computerizd video game. its real.
There is a reason kobe is held in MUCH higher regard than tmac and wade. kobe was both better in prime and his accolades and gameplay prove it.
prime kobe has prime wade beat in every way besides possibly as a slasher.. and that too is arguable. advanced stats or not.. everyone in basketball will tell you that.

i dont even need to argue tmac.

anyway.. u turned this argument into someting else and u are further making a fool of yourself. Look at the last page and you will see what my point was. Read slowly if that helps you

Well, when I watch Kobe, TMac and Wade play AT THEIR BEST, I think Wade and Tmac are the superior players. Wade and TMac are better passers and rebounders, slashing wise, I prefer Wade, then either TMac or Kobe, probably Kobe. TMac had the best stroke, then Kobe and Wade brings up the rear. As a defender, I'll take Wade over Kobe and both over TMac. This is all with my eyes mind you. Thats the problem with only citing your eyes though, people see different things. In addition, eyes can be biased. I'm not saying you don't use your eyes, I'm saying that stats should be considered as well, especially because you can't watch every play of every game.

But I know the secret behind your argument, it's because Kobe has 5 rings, so he must be better. I loathe arguments like this. If Kobe had no rings and kept losing in the playoffs, how would you rate each? Something tells me it'd be very different. And it shouldn't be because winning and losing is a TEAM ACCOMPLISHMENT.

Chronz
07-28-2011, 01:27 AM
This comes down to 3 players IMO

Baylor, Erving, D-Rob.

Not a fan of Pettit, I understand he dominated in much the same way as Robinson, but he wasnt in the Admirals league defensively and he dominated the league at a stage in its infancy where I dont put much stock into his sole title. Not only was Russell injured but he only had to win 8 games. The very next year he was eliminated by Elgin and his sub .500 Lakers, it marked the beginning of the end for him as a pinnacle player IMO.
Most importantly the reason I have Pettit outside the top 18 is because he faced off against Elgin led teams numerous times, sometimes with demonstrably more help around him, but the series were always tough and he even lost a few. I consider Elgin to be superior to Pettit and I find Elgins case to be the weakest of the 3 I named, itso facto the rest are also >. Still for comparisons sake we should examine their playoff careers first since we're all pretty much in agreement on their individual greatness, of course longevity should be factored in.

MTar786
07-28-2011, 01:30 AM
Well, when I watch Kobe, TMac and Wade play AT THEIR BEST, I think Wade and Tmac are the superior players. Wade and TMac are better passers and rebounders, slashing wise, I prefer Wade, then either TMac or Kobe, probably Kobe. TMac had the best stroke, then Kobe and Wade brings up the rear. As a defender, I'll take Wade over Kobe and both over TMac. This is all with my eyes mind you. Thats the problem with only citing your eyes though, people see different things. In addition, eyes can be biased. I'm not saying you don't use your eyes, I'm saying that stats should be considered as well, especially because you can't watch every play of every game.

But I know the secret behind your argument, it's because Kobe has 5 rings, so he must be better. I loathe arguments like this. If Kobe had no rings and kept losing in the playoffs, how would you rate each? Something tells me it'd be very different. And it shouldn't be because winning and losing is a TEAM ACCOMPLISHMENT.

i see where you're coming from. But i wouldnt be surprised if most nba players, gms and anyone affiliated with the sport would have said kobe was better.. oh wait.. they did.. for a few good seasons.
im not saying youre dumb for thinking wade is better in any way... Its just what most say. there is a fine line between advanced stats and wathcing the game and KNOWING the game. i know the game very well. i know nothing about advanced stats honestly. but something tells me im not crazy for thinking kobe has been the superior player to mac and wade. also i wouldnt say macs stroke was better than kobes. Infact tmac was very inconsistent (hence his UNDER AVERAGE fg%)
also wade is the better help defender but i would really wonder if you have some sort of biased opinon if you wanna tell me that wade was a better on ball defender than kobe was in his time.

but hey.. to each his own right?
id just prefer going by most expert opinions.
And we know who they all say is better :)
oh and ofcourse rings and stuff come into account.
if wade was the one sitting with the 5 rings i really wouldnt have much to say as to who is the better player then..
they have both been blessed with great teams.. kobe has made the most of his teams. That has to mean something :win::win::win::win::win:

btw, i like ur sig lol :)

Chronz
07-28-2011, 01:43 AM
Longevity Factor:
This isnt so much about years served or games/minutes played, but how quickly you became a star and how long you sustained that level of play.


Pettit stands alone in terms of career starts, at 22 he was a star from day 1. Karl Malone entered the NBA at the same age but didnt get All-Star acclaim until his 3rd season, even then it was a less impressive campaign. Elgin and D-Rob were roughly the same age (24) when they began their careers as instant stars (coincidentally both also had military/naval commitments hinder their playing days early).
And Julius Erving didnt enter the NBA until age 26, a time when many argue some of his best years were already lost. I suppose you have to consider his ABA days but just exactly how one does that is beyond me. As such I avoid the topic completely, for now at least, and just consider those to be at least All-NBA caliber seasons (which depending on who you ask might be a slight or overly generous).

In terms of career finishes however, Pettit croaked out first at 32 but remained an All-NBA player till the end, with his peak seasons coming early (Pre Russ/Wilt/Elgin) when he won a title, and a few scattered about in between. In all that gives him 11 Seasons, all of which were at the least All-NBA quality.

Erving played till he was gray but at 36 is the 2nd youngest to retire and though he technically remained an All-Star to the end, his efficiency and productivity was far from A-S typical much less All-NBA (which he stopped earning at 33). He still maxes out 16 Seasons, 12 of which he was named to an All-NBA team (ABA/NBA). He, like Pettit, had his best days (statistically) early in his career though he came on strong towards the midpoint and arguably played his finest ball (considering the comp) from 29-31, winning a championship and an MVP in the process. I like Erving vs Pettit from a Longevity standpoint right now.


D-Rob and Elgin have such similar career archs its kind of depressing, they both had 3 distinctly different phases of their careers. The early dominant days, the stretch where they recovered from injuries to play at an impressive albeit diminished form, and then finally their broken down and battered stage before retirement. Sadly for Elgin his medical problems took place in the 60's, though it makes his recovery all the more impressive it is ultimately less efficient. D-Rob was able to help his teams win titles and rode off into the sunset while Elgin prevented his and saw his team set a record for consecutive victories the minute he retired.

In all D-Rob played 13 Seasons (not counting his 6 gamer), he could only muster being an All-Star for 11 of them with 10 All-NBA Selections. From a production standpoint, all of the selections were justified.

Elgin played 12 seasons of at least 48-50+ games, both were similarly injury prone but given todays advancements you could argue Elgin wouldnt be such the risk, that he came back at all in that day and age was a testament to his abilities. In all he had 10 All-NBA Seasons, like Robinson saw his best days in his youth. Both fall short to Julius rather convincingly IMO.

That leaves the mythical Karl Malone and his 19 year career, surprisingly (or not) he "only" made 14 All-NBA Teams. Easily the most of the group, from a longevity standpoint the scorecard should rank them as so;
1) Malone
2) Doc
3) Pettit
4&5) D-Rob/Elgin

PatsSoxKnicks
07-28-2011, 01:44 AM
i see where you're coming from. But i wouldnt be surprised if most nba players, gms and anyone affiliated with the sport would have said kobe was better.. oh wait.. they did.. for a few good seasons.
im not saying youre dumb for thinking wade is better in any way... Its just what most say. there is a fine line between advanced stats and wathcing the game and KNOWING the game. i know the game very well. i know nothing about advanced stats honestly. but something tells me im not crazy for thinking kobe has been the superior player to mac and wade. also i wouldnt say macs stroke was better than kobes. Infact tmac was very inconsistent (hence his UNDER AVERAGE fg%)
also wade is the better help defender but i would really wonder if you have some sort of biased opinon if you wanna tell me that wade was a better on ball defender than kobe was in his time.

but hey.. to each his own right?
id just prefer going by most expert opinions.
And we know who they all say is better :)
oh and ofcourse rings and stuff come into account.
if wade was the one sitting with the 5 rings i really wouldnt have much to say as to who is the better player then..
they have both been blessed with great teams.. kobe has made the most of his teams. That has to mean something :win::win::win::win::win:

btw, i like ur sig lol :)

Well, in TMac's best season he shot almost 39% from downtown on 6 attempts vs. the same for Kobe but on less attempts. But I'll admit, I recently watched TMac's 12 points in 30 seconds (or whatever it was) and that probably influence my opinion/eyes on his 3 point shot (also fresh in my mind were some of Kobe's misses from the 3 point line in the Mavs series). This is why I think some form of stats need to be used as well.

And while I know you don't want to use advanced stats at all, why not something like TS%, eFG%, Ast%, TOV%, etc. which are VERY simple concepts. I could explain it to you in a minute or so. They aren't complicated stats at all.

MTar786
07-28-2011, 01:54 AM
Well, in TMac's best season he shot almost 39% from downtown on 6 attempts vs. the same for Kobe but on less attempts. But I'll admit, I recently watched TMac's 12 points in 30 seconds (or whatever it was) and that probably influence my opinion/eyes on his 3 point shot (also fresh in my mind were some of Kobe's misses from the 3 point line in the Mavs series). This is why I think some form of stats need to be used as well.

And while I know you don't want to use advanced stats at all, why not something like TS%, eFG%, Ast%, TOV%, etc. which are VERY simple concepts. I could explain it to you in a minute or so. They aren't complicated stats at all.

what a game!! I would aslo prob have a different opinon if i just watched that game. SICK! lol.. And tmacs range was very impressive. for some reason kobes range is off now days. im putting it on his screwed up hands.. but id still say tmac had slightly better range than kobe.. he just didnt have the mid range shot like kobe did. either way.. tmac was a beast. and his prime imo was comparable to kobe and atleast on par with wade.. he just didnt have the longetivity or health or even the teams wade and kobe had =/
I guess its easy for us to forget how a player was when they get old.. like people sometimes forget how amazing shaq was. i watch tmac a lot because i learnt to appreciate him as a player early. (I hated kobe in the 3peat era)
was a shaq fan. Tats how i know about wade too.. because when shaq got traded wade became my fav player to watch.. i stopped liking him only this season lol.
Oh.. and ya, id appreciate if you explain the basic/important things of advanced stats like ts and efg?
thanks man

PatsSoxKnicks
07-28-2011, 02:12 AM
what a game!! I would aslo prob have a different opinon if i just watched that game. SICK! lol.. And tmacs range was very impressive. for some reason kobes range is off now days. im putting it on his screwed up hands.. but id still say tmac had slightly better range than kobe.. he just didnt have the mid range shot like kobe did. either way.. tmac was a beast. and his prime imo was comparable to kobe and atleast on par with wade.. he just didnt have the longetivity or health or even the teams wade and kobe had =/
I guess its easy for us to forget how a player was when they get old.. like people sometimes forget how amazing shaq was. i watch tmac a lot because i learnt to appreciate him as a player early. (I hated kobe in the 3peat era)
was a shaq fan. Tats how i know about wade too.. because when shaq got traded wade became my fav player to watch.. i stopped liking him only this season lol.
Oh.. and ya, id appreciate if you explain the basic/important things of advanced stats like ts and efg?
thanks man

I wouldn't suggest at all that TMac is as good as Kobe for his career. Not at all the case, TMac doesn't have the longevity. But prime/peak TMac was a beauty to watch and I think a good argument could be made for him vs. prime/peak Kobe/Wade. And yes, he didn't have the teams either Wade or Kobe had. In fact, he used to put up some pretty crazy games in the playoffs. Sadly, no one remembers that and instead they seem to focus on his team losing early.

As for some of the more basic advanced stats, TS% is basically points per possession divided by 2. The 2 is there to make it easier to read/understand (at least thats what I've read). eFG% is basically FG% but it accounts for the fact that a 3 point shot is worth 1 more point than a 2 point shot. If a player shoots 3-6 from the 2 point line, he has 6 points and say another player shoots 2-6 from the 3 point line, he also has 6 points. So they have the same # of points on the same number of shot attempts. But FG% doesn't realize this. However, both players have the same eFG%. TS% takes this a step further and includes free throws.

PatsSoxKnicks
07-28-2011, 02:23 AM
BTW, great stuff Chronz. But how come you didn't include Chuck in your post?

Lakersfan2483
07-28-2011, 02:48 AM
This comes down to 3 players IMO

Baylor, Erving, D-Rob.

Not a fan of Pettit, I understand he dominated in much the same way as Robinson, but he wasnt in the Admirals league defensively and he dominated the league at a stage in its infancy where I dont put much stock into his sole title. Not only was Russell injured but he only had to win 8 games. The very next year he was eliminated by Elgin and his sub .500 Lakers, it marked the beginning of the end for him as a pinnacle player IMO.
Most importantly the reason I have Pettit outside the top 18 is because he faced off against Elgin led teams numerous times, sometimes with demonstrably more help around him, but the series were always tough and he even lost a few. I consider Elgin to be superior to Pettit and I find Elgins case to be the weakest of the 3 I named, itso facto the rest are also >. Still for comparisons sake we should examine their playoff careers first since we're all pretty much in agreement on their individual greatness, of course longevity should be factored in.

Where do you rank Charles Barkley on your all time list?

Swashcuff
07-28-2011, 10:07 AM
i said none of them are at the same level as a PRIME kobe. like i said, you need to learn how to read.

You need to learn to have a debate because you obviously are a slow person.



peak stats doesnt really mean much for lebrons case or a lot of other players in history for me.

give him 7 seasons straight of that and people would be saying kobe had the best peak of all time bar none..

this isnt a knock on any players.. its just my philosophy on how 'peaks' can be sometimes misleading


At no point during that post did you mention the word prime. My rebuttal was


You do realize that Kobe's peak was not as good as you make it out to be right?

It's arguable that Wade and McGrady had better peaks.

Did you see me mention the word Prime? Did you?


i must be missing something here? lol you think its arguable that tmac and wade were better than a prime kobe???

you would see how ******** it is for you to say that wade and tmac are comparable to kobe in his prime.



I said peak not prime.

I would love to see you argue that Kobe's peak season was better than that of Wade's and T-Mac's.



and id love to see you argue wade and tmacs peak as opposed to kobes.

Tell me why lie?


and no, i dont care about advanced stats. look at them play. watch how effective they are on the court with your own eyes. this isnt a computerizd video game. its real.
There is a reason kobe is held in MUCH higher regard than tmac and wade. kobe was both better in prime and his accolades and gameplay prove it.
prime kobe has prime wade beat in every way besides possibly as a slasher.. and that too is arguable.
better shooter, more range, higher iq, better defensively, more clutch etc...
advanced stats or not.. everyone in basketball will tell you that.

patsSOXknicks already explained all this to you but would ignore all what he said.


i dont even need to argue tmac.

anyway.. u turned this argument into someting else and u are further making a fool of yourself. Look at the last page and you will see what my point was. Read slowly if that helps you

oh and.. You just tried to indicate tmac as a better playoff player than kobe
you deserve a life time of face palms for that

I am making a fool of myself?

You need to take some of your own advice because only a fool would think that I attempted to indicate that T-Mac is a better playoff player than Kobe. I compared 7 games of the same year in which they all had their best seasons. Only a fool would read that as me comparing their careers.

You go only by what your eyes tell you. From reading your posts I can clearly tell your eyes should never be trusted in any basketball discussion.

Know what the stupid thing is, people like you who have an agenda for a certain player will always say he's better than others regardless. How could you use your eyes when you are a biased fan? Because your biased eyes tell you Kobe is the best does that make it fact? NO.

Your eyes can tell you Angelina Jolie is the hottest woman in Hollywood. Does that make it a fact? Your eyes are biased and you are closed minded you'll never understand how to gauge any player's worth with you ludicrous and biased thinking.

Swashcuff
07-28-2011, 10:11 AM
Depending on how you define peak vs. prime, I've got the numbers. Prime I would probably say is the best 5 consecutive seasons. Peak is either best season or best 3 seasons. As you're aware, in my calculations, I looked at best 3 seasons for peak but perhaps I should look at best season too (something else on my to do list).

Anyways, looking at each of these 3 different ways to evaluate peak and prime, here's the numbers on Kobe, Wade and TMac.

What most would probably consider prime:

Win Shares:


best 5 consecutive seasons
Kobe 64.2
Wade 54.2
Tmac 60.2


EWA (basically PER):


best 5 consecutive seasons
Kobe 112.66
Wade 107.46
Tmac 111.69


Peak:

Win Shares:


best 3 seasons
Kobe 44.0
Wade 42.1
Tmac 40.3


EWA:


best 3 seasons
Kobe 79.47
Wade 79.09
Tmac 72.37


Another measure for basically absolute peak:

Win Shares:


best season
Kobe 15.3
Wade 14.7
Tmac 16.1


EWA:


best season
Kobe 28.53
Wade 30.18
Tmac 29.10


Kobe's prime is better, although I feel like a big part of the reason is Wade basically lost 1 season. If you look at peak for best 3 seasons, Kobe is the best, which I did find surprising. However, looking at individual seasons, Kobe is worse than TMac in both WS and PER and worse than Wade in PER, though better in WS.

Anyways, all 3 are close in terms of peak and even prime. Wade is also still playing in his prime, so I wouldn't be surprised to see him surpass Kobe in that regard. He needs 2 more seasons of 11.9 WS (thereby replacing his 3.3 WS season which really drags down his totals) to surpass Kobe for best 5 consecutive seasons. Certainly doable based on his last 3 seasons. TMac on the other hand, has to settle for being behind Kobe in best 3 seasons and prime but he still has the better individual season.

Also, as an added note, if you use PER or WS/48 instead of the total value type stats like EWA and WS, then Wade has a better peak and TMac's best season is better, not sure about his best 3 seasons though.

From a standpoint of who's better at their best, Wade has Kobe beat in he has 3 seasons where his WS/48 are better than Kobe's. So I could certainly see that argument. Same goes for TMac based on his best season.

Thanks for sharing this.

Some however will never see the light. Kobe avg 35ppg scored 62 in 3 and 81 in a game and he had the best peak for them. Oh and don't forget that he won 3 rings prior so he must be the best.

There is no debating that Kobe has had a better career but to say something as foolish as Kobe being the best ever if his peak repeated itself for 7 years is downright foolish when that very same can be said for possibly 20 other players.

Chronz
07-28-2011, 11:43 AM
BTW, great stuff Chronz. But how come you didn't include Chuck in your post?

Oh crap we already voted in Karl didnt we, I was writing that last week and decided to post it despite never finishing it. UGH I had thought we voted in Chuck.

Chronz
07-28-2011, 11:44 AM
D. Rob's a fine choice, but let's not forget that this guy was infamous for going ghost in critical moments of the playoffs throughout the entirety of his career; some of those games versus Hakeem when they were both prime were painful to watch as a supporter of the Admiral. Hard to blame him, but it did illuminate that despite the incredible numbers, he wasn't the same class of center as Shaq/'Dream.
Well if you were an observer in Pettit's time you would find much the same wouldnt you? I dont know if its to a similar degree but one could make the comparison. For instance lets replace Hakeem with his contemporary and playoff foe. Flash back to G.7 of the 1960 Finals, biggest game of his career at that point considering Russ was actually healthy this go around. What ensued was a thorough beating the likes of which you dont really want to remember for the last game of the season. In the process Pettit put up 22-14-4 on 18FGA, meanwhile Russ put up 22-35-4 on 15 FGA. Im sure Pettit has fallen short his fair amount of series/matchups vs superior players but how should we measure that?

PLAYERS FAN
07-28-2011, 02:38 PM
Depending on how you define peak vs. prime, I've got the numbers. Prime I would probably say is the best 5 consecutive seasons. Peak is either best season or best 3 seasons. As you're aware, in my calculations, I looked at best 3 seasons for peak but perhaps I should look at best season too (something else on my to do list).

Anyways, looking at each of these 3 different ways to evaluate peak and prime, here's the numbers on Kobe, Wade and TMac.

What most would probably consider prime:

Win Shares:


best 5 consecutive seasons
Kobe 64.2
Wade 54.2
Tmac 60.2


EWA (basically PER):


best 5 consecutive seasons
Kobe 112.66
Wade 107.46
Tmac 111.69


Peak:

Win Shares:


best 3 seasons
Kobe 44.0
Wade 42.1
Tmac 40.3


EWA:


best 3 seasons
Kobe 79.47
Wade 79.09
Tmac 72.37


Another measure for basically absolute peak:

Win Shares:


best season
Kobe 15.3
Wade 14.7
Tmac 16.1


EWA:


best season
Kobe 28.53
Wade 30.18
Tmac 29.10


Kobe's prime is better, although I feel like a big part of the reason is Wade basically lost 1 season. If you look at peak for best 3 seasons, Kobe is the best, which I did find surprising. However, looking at individual seasons, Kobe is worse than TMac in both WS and PER and worse than Wade in PER, though better in WS.

Anyways, all 3 are close in terms of peak and even prime. Wade is also still playing in his prime, so I wouldn't be surprised to see him surpass Kobe in that regard. He needs 2 more seasons of 11.9 WS (thereby replacing his 3.3 WS season which really drags down his totals) to surpass Kobe for best 5 consecutive seasons. Certainly doable based on his last 3 seasons. TMac on the other hand, has to settle for being behind Kobe in best 3 seasons and prime but he still has the better individual season.

Also, as an added note, if you use PER or WS/48 instead of the total value type stats like EWA and WS, then Wade has a better peak and TMac's best season is better, not sure about his best 3 seasons though.

From a standpoint of who's better at their best, Wade has Kobe beat in he has 3 seasons where his WS/48 are better than Kobe's. So I could certainly see that argument. Same goes for TMac based on his best season.

I'm curious what u thank of this advance stats?


In the regular season for PER:
Dirk's is 23.73 #15 while Bird's is 23.50 #19

In the playoffs for PER
Dirk is at 24.75 #7 while Bird is a at 21.41 #27

7. Dirk Nowitzki 24.75
27. Larry Bird* 21.41




In the season for WS/PER 48*
Dirk is #12 while Bird is #19

12. Dirk Nowitzki 0.2137
19. Larry Bird* 0.2032


In the playoffs Dirk is #5 in WS/PER 48 while Bird is #35*

5. Dirk Nowitzki 0.2067
35. Larry Bird* 0.1731

MR.CROW
07-28-2011, 03:43 PM
John Stockton, a 10-time NBA All-Star, commandingly holds the NBA record for career assists with 15,806 (10.5 per game). Stockton also holds the record for assists-per-game average over one season (14.5 in 1990), and is one of three players who have logged more than 1,000 assists in one season, joining Kevin Porter (1,099 in 1979) and Isiah Thomas (1,123 in 1985) in the exclusive list. Stockton did this seven times, with season totals of 1,164, 1,134, 1,128, 1,126, 1,118, 1,031 and 1,011 assists.
He and Karl Malone are regarded by many as the quintessential pick and roll duo. Apart from his passing skill, Stockton was also a capable scorer (13.1 points per game career average and a .515 career shooting percentage) with a reliable three-point shot (.384 lifetime average). He is 30th on the all-time NBA scoring list with 19,711 career points.Despite the fact that he never pulled down more than 9 rebounds (or recorded more than 9 steals) during a regular season game,
On defense, Stockton holds the NBA record for career steals with 3,265, nearly 30 percent more than second placed Michael Jordan, who had 2,514.
Stockton was known for his unassuming, no-nonsense approach to the game, hard-nosed defense, and fanatical work-ethic in preparation, which resulted in his extreme durability. He played 1,504 of 1,526 possible games in his 19-season career.I'll take the third best point gaurd over the eight best center any day

Lakers ALL DAY
07-28-2011, 03:56 PM
You guys are clowns:mad:

It's EASILY Isiah Thomas.........2 time Back to Back World Champion....Top 5 Point Guard of ALL TIME

ONLY guy who can say he beat the following players in their respective Primes:

Michael Jordan
Larry Bird
Magic Johnson

Tony_Starks
07-28-2011, 05:36 PM
As far as overall play and impact on the game its hard to look past Dr J. Im actually really shocked he slipped this low, he's in my top 10. When you look at what he did and how he changed the game? He was MJ's idle, that says it all right there.

I think as far as taking the game to another level excitement wise it was Dr J, then Magic and Bird, and then MJ.