PDA

View Full Version : PSD's Official #37 NBA Player of All-Time



JordansBulls
09-18-2011, 08:57 PM
Voting for #36 has concluded and PSD's Official #36 NBA Player of all time is....

Kevin Mchale

Top 2 Voting:

Kevin Mchale = 20 votes
Allen Iverson = 16 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)
15. Julius Erving (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=637671)
16. David Robinson (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=638526)
17. Charles Barkley (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=639576)
18. John Stockton (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=640285)
19. George Mikan (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=641172)
20. Kevin Garnett (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=641975)
21. LeBron James (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=642511)
22. Dirk Nowitzki (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=643161)
23. Bob Pettit (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=644031)
24. John Havlicek (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=645330)
25. Elgin Baylor (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=645990)
26. Dwyane Wade (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=646496)
27. Scottie Pippen (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=647144)
28. Rick Barry (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=648440)
29. Isiah Thomas (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=649170)
30. Patrick Ewing (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=649815)
31. Bob Cousy (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=650318)
32. Walt Frazier (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=651181)
33. Clyde Drexler (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=651737)
34. Gary Payton (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=652073)
35. Jason Kidd (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=652644)
36. Kevin Mchale (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=653111)



Voting will now begin for the #37 NBA Player All Time


These are the players that can be voted for the #37 spot.

Willis Reed
Dominique Wilkins
Sam Jones
Allen Iverson
Steve Nash
Wes Unseld
Dave Cowens
Bob Mcadoo
Bill Walton
George Gervin
James Worthy
Reggie Miller
Elvin Hayes
Dolph Schayes
Nate Thurmond
Shawn Kemp
Alonzo Mourning
Kevin Johnson
Jerry Lucas
Robert Parish
Nate Thurmond
Paul Pierce
Pau Gasol
Artis Gilmore
Hal Greer

Raps18-19 Champ
09-18-2011, 09:00 PM
Iverson probably should get his due. :laugh2:

JordansBulls
09-18-2011, 09:00 PM
Vote: Bill Walton
Has a league and finals mvp. Brought the Portland franchise there only title in league history and beat a prime Kareem and prime Dr J in the playoffs without HCA in order to win the title.

KnicksorBust
09-18-2011, 09:02 PM
Vote: Bill Walton
Has a league and finals mvp. Brought the Portland franchise there only title in league history and beat a prime Kareem and prime Dr J in the playoffs without HCA in order to win the title.

Willis Reed. Has a league and 2 finals mvps. :)

Chronz
09-18-2011, 09:12 PM
Its time to honor the 1 hit wonders or short career guys. Walton, Reed or Cowens. However if you guys still favor longevity then AI, Nique, or someone

Bruno
09-18-2011, 09:13 PM
I went Nash here. One of the most efficient scorers in league history, and one of the greatest facilitators in league history. Two MVPs doesn't hurt either. IMO 5-6 guys have arguments here, I expect split votes among those who see Iverson as more a 40-50 player, allowing AI to win this poll here at #37.

TheNumber37
09-18-2011, 09:47 PM
Iveron seems right at 37.

ShakeN'Bake
09-18-2011, 09:55 PM
Between Reed, Iverson, Walton, Worthy and Gervin. I am not sure where I am going with this pick. I need to consider wether or not Walton lack of longevity hurts him against this pool of players at this spot.

Chronz
09-18-2011, 09:58 PM
Lol how fitting

KnicksorBust
09-18-2011, 10:46 PM
I went Nash here. One of the most efficient scorers in league history, and one of the greatest facilitators in league history. Two MVPs doesn't hurt either. IMO 5-6 guys have arguments here, I expect split votes among those who see Iverson as more a 40-50 player, allowing AI to win this poll here at #37.

You could be right. It had to end eventually. I'm big on Reed here but I love the Walton argument. His 18 month stretch was one of the most dominant stretches in NBA History. How important is longevity will become a huge sticking point in the upcoming votes.

Hustlenomics
09-18-2011, 11:10 PM
-Big East Rookie of the Year award
-2X Big East Defensive Player of the Year
-First team AP All-American, 1996
-97 Rookie Of The Year
-97 Rookie Game MVP
-97 All Rookie First-Team
-7 x All-NBA Selection
-3 x steals champion(01,02,03)
-4 x NBA Scoring Champion(99,01,02,05)
-11 x NBA All-Star
-2 x NBA All-Star Game MVP(01,05)
-2001 NBA MVP
-1983 Career Steals (12th all-time)
-5624 Career Assists(4th Actively)
-24,368 Career Points in just 914 games played (17th all-time)
-One of only 5 players in NBA History to average at least 30 ppg and 8 apg in a season
-Career Average of 2.2 SPG(7th all-time)
-Career Average of 6.2 APG
-Career Average of 26.7 PPG(6th all-time)
-5 Consecutive games of 40+ points as a rookie
-Playoff Steal record
-Became fifth player ever to make an average of 30 points and seven assists in a season


VOTE: ALLEN IVERSON

Hellcrooner
09-18-2011, 11:13 PM
2 > 1 its maths.

so Nash here.

Gators123
09-19-2011, 12:07 AM
Nash

Lakersfan2483
09-19-2011, 02:58 AM
I am voting for Iverson again. His not getting his just due in terms of rankings. He wasn't as great as some make him out to be and not as bad as others make him out to be. He's defintely a top 40 player though.

Baller1
09-19-2011, 03:19 AM
I'll take Gervin here.

naps
09-19-2011, 03:49 AM
Allen Iverson should be taken off the poll. That way the voting process would be more fair. People would vote for actually who they feel deserves it, rather than voting for AI's closest competitor so that AI can't win. This is probably the 12th time or so AI finished 2nd. That tells you the story here.

Stuckey#3
09-19-2011, 03:59 AM
Voting for The Answer... did Nash ever have a cool nick name? Not that it matters.

mightybosstone
09-19-2011, 11:40 AM
I'm still voting for Walton, but I think this is Iverson's time to finally make the list. I know everyone has been fighting so hard against it, but I almost feel like his popularity among fans and his reputation of scoring will despite his diminutive size means he should crack the top 40. There are few players who have won nothing and reached such an incredible fan base in any sport over the last two decades, and I think that speaks to Iverson's game, even if advanced stats speak against him.

I mean... if some of you are all trying SO hard to get him to NOT make this list, doesn't that speak to how important a player he was over the years to the leagues and to the fans? That being said, more than anything, I'm just looking forward to not having him on the polls anymore.

Edit: And for the record, if this was my list, I don't know that Iverson cracks my top 50.

Chronz
09-19-2011, 12:32 PM
I'm still voting for Walton, but I think this is Iverson's time to finally make the list. I know everyone has been fighting so hard against it, but I almost feel like his popularity among fans and his reputation of scoring will despite his diminutive size means he should crack the top 40. There are few players who have won nothing and reached such an incredible fan base in any sport over the last two decades, and I think that speaks to Iverson's game, even if advanced stats speak against him.

I mean... if some of you are all trying SO hard to get him to NOT make this list, doesn't that speak to how important a player he was over the years to the leagues and to the fans? That being said, more than anything, I'm just looking forward to not having him on the polls anymore.

Edit: And for the record, if this was my list, I don't know that Iverson cracks my top 50.
Nobody is fighting or trying hard at all, certainly not any harder than the fan boys who have lobbied for him from the onset he was nominated, so your point about this meaning something works both ways.

The coalition against him arose to combat his homers and we've done a great job ensuring the clearly superior careers went in front of him. But we aren't the unreasonable ones, some is us have already started voting for AI. We weren't voting against AI in place of bums but a plethora of players we consider superior. They on the other hand have been voting for him as early as #9 against some truly laughable comparisons. So yes he may be important to them but what exactly do those emotions that have to with this list?

Chronz
09-19-2011, 12:41 PM
Allen Iverson should be taken off the poll. That way the voting process would be more fair. People would vote for actually who they feel deserves it

People have been voting for players they feel deserve it over AI.



, rather than voting for AI's closest competitor so that AI can't win.
These 2 statements are not mutually exclusive, when we have a plethora of superior players to choose from it only makes sense that we wait for the guy who has the most backing before making our vote. Why waste a vote when you can actually make a difference? Besides most of the times I waited, I ended voting for the guy I was originally going to anyways.



This is probably the 12th time or so AI finished 2nd.
You guys had a chance when the non-AI people were split and AI finished 3rd. I honestly don't know what happened, either more voters showed up or less homers voted for AI.



That tells you the story here.
It really does.

mightybosstone
09-19-2011, 01:01 PM
Nobody is fighting or trying hard at all, certainly not any harder than the fan boys who have lobbied for him from the onset he was nominated, so your point about this meaning something works both ways.

The coalition against him arose to combat his homers and we've done a great job ensuring the clearly superior careers went in front of him. But we aren't the unreasonable ones, some is us have already started voting for AI. We weren't voting against AI in place of bums but a plethora of players we consider superior. They on the other hand have been voting for him as early as #9 against some truly laughable comparisons. So yes he may be important to them but what exactly do those emotions that have to with this list?

Understandable. But you had to expect this would happen. This is PSD and homers and people who know nothing about basketball before 2000 are going to vote on these lists. It wouldn't be a true PSD list without some homerism thrown in, and those voters who are voting for players just to keep Iverson from winning are no better than the homers are.

I think we should all be voting for who we legitimately think is the best player at each spot. If Iverson wins here, so be it. But if people vote for Nash, not because they think he's the best player, but because they think he has the best chance to beat Iverson, then that's a lame vote...

Hellcrooner
09-19-2011, 01:53 PM
^the problem is nash ( and others stil remaining) indeed IS a better player than iverson.
tehre is a high number of players on board that i would vote before i voted Nash tough, and all of them i would vote before iverson.
So im voting the lesser of two evils.

naps
09-19-2011, 03:12 PM
People have been voting for players they feel deserve it over AI.


These 2 statements are not mutually exclusive, when we have a plethora of superior players to choose from it only makes sense that we wait for the guy who has the most backing before making our vote. Why waste a vote when you can actually make a difference? Besides most of the times I waited, I ended voting for the guy I was originally going to anyways.


You guys had a chance when the non-AI people were split and AI finished 3rd. I honestly don't know what happened, either more voters showed up or less homers voted for AI.


It really does.


You are saying like AI is losing by big margins. If you go back you should see he's losing a very few votes. If what you are saying was correct then those winner should have won with big margins. Ofcourse not everyone is voting for who they feel deserve it. I have seen posts where posters said they are saving their votes so AI can't win. AI is second for the nth time now and there is an clear agenda behind it. No rocket science here.

ShakeN'Bake
09-19-2011, 03:22 PM
You are saying like AI is losing by big margins. If you go back you should see he's losing a very few votes. If what you are saying was correct then those winner should have won with big margins. Ofcourse not everyone is voting for who they feel deserve it. I have seen posts where posters said they are saving their votes so AI can't win. AI is second for the nth time now and there is an clear agenda behind it. No rocket science here.

:shrug: if it makes you feel any better I've added my vote to AI for the first time in this round.

Chronz
09-19-2011, 03:28 PM
You are saying like AI is losing by big margins.
Wat? I never suggested anything like this. You must not have understood my point.



Ofcourse not everyone is voting for who they feel deserve it. I have seen posts where posters said they are saving their votes so AI can't win.
Yeah and some of them are finally voting for AI.
Again, we are voting for people we feel deserve the nod OVER AI. Put it this way, if we feel there are a handful of superior players why wouldn't we vote for the guy who has the most support, specifically when it was the guy we wanted to vote for originally?



AI is second for the nth time now and there is an clear agenda behind it. No rocket science here.
Agreed, that agenda is that we are voting for SUPERIOR players. And again, what happened when he finished 3rd? The homers had a great chance at voting him in then, what happened?

mightybosstone
09-19-2011, 03:39 PM
Wow... I just realized that Penny Hardaway is not only on this list, but has earned a vote. How did that happen? Did someone get confused and vote for the wrong player? He's not even the best player left with the last name Hardaway, and I wouldn't put either of those guys and "Top 50" in the same sentence unless it was "Top 50 players of the 90s" or "Top 50 Hardaways."

Bruno
09-19-2011, 03:46 PM
Point blank, AI fans rank him about 10 spots higher than everybody else. That's why he's been the focus of petting debating in these threads since (at least) #30.

Have some people voted against him simply to prevent him from winning? yea, a few, a small handful. AI lost by four or more votes every poll since #31, exception being the Gary Payton thread. That's the only thread dictated by these claims of an anti-Iverson coalition. The rest have been separated by four or more votes, regardless of how many times he's finished second.

mightybosstone
09-19-2011, 04:01 PM
Point blank, AI fans rank him about 10 spots higher than everybody else. That's why he's been the focus of petting debating in these threads since (at least) #30.

I actually think it's more than that. I mean, I'd have to go back and look, but I know he's been receiving votes since the top 10 and has been getting serious consideration since the 20s. If I really sat down and spent hours trying to determine my own top 50, I think he makes that list, but just barely. I would think he would fall in the 45-50 range, but for voters who take his inefficiency more seriously, he probably won't even crack their list.

But if it was up to AI voters, I imagine he would have made the top 25, and I think that's WAY too high...

Hellcrooner
09-19-2011, 04:04 PM
I actually think it's more than that. I mean, I'd have to go back and look, but I know he's been receiving votes since the top 10 and has been getting serious consideration since the 20s. If I really sat down and spent hours trying to determine my own top 50, I think he makes that list, but just barely. I would think he would fall in the 45-50 range, but for voters who take his inefficiency more seriously, he probably won't even crack their list.

But if it was up to AI voters, I imagine he would have made the top 25, and I think that's WAY too high...

he wouldnt enter my top 50 list.

but i admit my top 50 lsit would look really different than the average one, because i have high consideration for 50s 60s 70s and 80s players

while most people only considers the 10-15 moreflashy name oldies and then makes teh rest with late 80s 90s and modern players.

mightybosstone
09-19-2011, 04:28 PM
he wouldnt enter my top 50 list.

but i admit my top 50 lsit would look really different than the average one, because i have high consideration for 50s 60s 70s and 80s players

while most people only considers the 10-15 moreflashy name oldies and then makes teh rest with late 80s 90s and modern players.

I think I put equal consideration to players in the 80s-today. However, I wouldn't necessarily consider guys in the 60s quite as highly and I CERTAINLY wouldn't give as much consideration for players in the 50s. In the end, though, I would ask myself these questions when making my list (and yes, there's more to it than that, and stats are important, but it really boils down to these questions)...

1. Would this player have been considered a top 5 player during his career?
2. How did this player prove himself in the postseason?
3. Did this player have any glaring weaknesses?
4. How instrumental was he to his team's success?
5. Could this player succeed in pretty much any NBA era?

I think Iverson fits 1, 4 and 5 extremely well and he's okay at 2. I think it's 3 that really hurts him, because of his atrocious shooting numbers and mediocre defense. But, regardless of his inefficiency, it would be difficult for me to leave him out of the top 50 because of 1 and 4. When you consider that Aaron freakin' McKie was the second best offensive option on that 00-01 Finals team that won a game against the Lakers, I think that speaks to how well the guy could carry a team on his back despite the talent around him. (Although I have to give props to Mutombo for anchoring that defense)

Hellcrooner
09-19-2011, 04:32 PM
I think I put equal consideration to players in the 80s-today. However, I wouldn't necessarily consider guys in the 60s quite as highly and I CERTAINLY wouldn't give as much consideration for players in the 50s. In the end, though, I would ask myself these questions when making my list (and yes, there's more to it than that, and stats are important, but it really boils down to these questions)...

1. Would this player have been considered a top 5 player during his career?
2. How did this player prove himself in the postseason?
3. Did this player have any glaring weaknesses?
4. How instrumental was he to his team's success?
5. Could this player succeed in pretty much any NBA era?

I think Iverson fits 1, 4 and 5 extremely well and he's okay at 2. I think it's 3 that really hurts him, because of his atrocious shooting numbers and mediocre defense. But, regardless of his inefficiency, it would be difficult for me to leave him out of the top 50 because of 1 and 4. When you consider that Aaron freakin' McKie was the second best offensive option on that 00-01 Finals team that won a game against the Lakers, I think that speaks to how well the guy could carry a team on his back despite the talent around him. (Although I have to give props to Mutombo for anchoring that defense)

point 5 , a traditional minded coach of the 50s and 60s wouldnt have given him any burn because of the inneficient shooting.
As a matter of fact in the preshot clock era he woudl have sucked, because he NEEDS a ton of shots to "work".

And botu his finals run.
Weak east and one of the best defensive units ever.

mightybosstone
09-19-2011, 04:44 PM
point 5 , a traditional minded coach of the 50s and 60s wouldnt have given him any burn because of the inneficient shooting.
:laugh: Dude, you could not be further from the truth. George Mikan, easily the greatest pre-shot clock player in NBA history, was a career .404 shooter. AI is a career .425 shooter. And his TS% was .35% higher than Mikan's. Also, you put Iverson in the 50s and his speed would absolutely dominate the entire league.


As a matter of fact in the preshot clock era he woudl have sucked, because he NEEDS a ton of shots to "work".
Again... this is completely wrong. Mikan took 22+ shots per game in his first four seasons. Iverson only took 22 FGA a game one season his entire career (01-02).


And botu his finals run.
Weak east and one of the best defensive units ever.
They were very good defensively, but one of the best ever? They were only the 5th best defensive team in that one season! And they were 15th offensively despite having no legit No. 2 and a few very weak No. 3s.

Edit: I cannot believe I'm defending Iverson right now...

Bruno
09-19-2011, 05:26 PM
I actually think it's more than that

This is the poll for #28, where he came in third.
http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=648440

At #29 he finished second, but twelve votes behind the leading vote getter (Thomas).

His streak of consecutive second places didn't start until #30
http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=649815

AI fans should be glad he'll crack top 40.

Those who aren't should be glad that we were able to get a plethora of guards including Thomas, Cousy, Frazier, Drexler, Payton, and Kidd on the board before AI (all selected from #29-#35)

Bruno
09-19-2011, 05:28 PM
Crooner, there's no arguing in favor of Mikans efficiency. Just sayin' :laugh2:

TheNumber37
09-19-2011, 05:43 PM
Iverson is top 40 overall and a top 10 offensive player. It's hard to knock Ai for not being efficient when he never had a legit number 2 to play with. When ai was playing with melo and webber he shot the ball much better than in his lone sixer years. Honestly, if Iverson had played with a half decent pg who could defend and shoot and played with a guy like KG. His game would've been even better.

mightybosstone
09-19-2011, 06:17 PM
Iverson is top 40 overall and a top 10 offensive player. It's hard to knock Ai for not being efficient when he never had a legit number 2 to play with. When ai was playing with melo and webber he shot the ball much better than in his lone sixer years. Honestly, if Iverson had played with a half decent pg who could defend and shoot and played with a guy like KG. His game would've been even better.

If Hakeem had played with a better supporting cast, he would have won more than two titles. If Jordan doesn't retire early twice, maybe he wins 10 titles. If Bill Walton doesn't have injury problems, maybe he becomes the greatest center in the history of the NBA. If Len Bias hadn't died, he might have become the greatest Celtic of all time.

You can play the "what if" game all you want to, but in the end we can only go off their actual production. It's the reason why Walton isn't getting more consideration here, why Hakeem isn't considered top 5 by most people and it's the reason why there's even a sliver of doubt that MJ was the greatest player in the history of the game.

Knicks21
09-19-2011, 06:42 PM
Nash here.

Stuckey#3
09-19-2011, 08:51 PM
I like Nash and all... but what did he ever accomplish by himself?

He always had a strong supporting cast. The only season that he didn't have a supporting cast he missed the playoffs. You can thank Sarver for that.

Anyway... AI took the Sixers to the Finals with Eric Snow being his second best player. When AI went to Denver to work as a second option his production value didn't falter it essentially stayed the same.

Nash may be the better overall guard... but not the better overall player. Yes he has two MVP's but one of them should have an asterik.

Hustlenomics
09-19-2011, 09:02 PM
There's no way Nash is better than iverson, the hate is getting ridiculous

Chronz
09-19-2011, 09:59 PM
There's no way Nash is better than iverson, the hate is getting ridiculous
What makes it hate?

Both guys stole an MVP from Shaq, Nash took home 1 more.

Nash lost to the eventual champs just like AI, one guy was more prolific the other more efficient. One made his teammates better, the other needed a specific team around him. How is it not comparable?

Swashcuff
09-19-2011, 10:05 PM
I just realized something. Why have Grant Hill and Penny and Tim Hardaway been added to the options? No one has nominated them. Yet still Walt Bellamy, Chris Paul, Dwight Howard, Sidney Moncrief, Tiny Archibald and Paul Arizin have not been added to the poll. They have just as good and in most cases better cases than those guys.

Chronz
09-19-2011, 10:27 PM
I cant believe how old Nash is yet still in his prime, hes been going on so long that hes actually closed the gap AI had on him in terms of career longevity.

pd7631
09-19-2011, 10:59 PM
Where are all the knocks on Steve Nash's defense?

If AI gets the label of a poor defender, then Steve Nash might as well equal a 5 on 4 in favor of the opposition when he's on defense.


Steve Nash got to play with prime Dirk, prime Marion, prime Stoudemire and never made it as far as AI did with a group of castoffs from other teams.

AI was one of the most difficult players EVER to defend. Like I said in another thread, the only person that could stop AI was himself. The guy could get any shot on the court he wanted, and was simply unguardable during his prime.

His 33ppg average in the 2001 playoffs is something that only Hakeem and MJ were able to do in as many games played in a single postseason.

Not that Steve Nash isn't tough, but AI put his body through more abuse than any player I can remember seeing. The guy is the definition of tough, and despite what many posters on this site think, he's one of the most respected players to ever play the game.

By the time Steve Nash made a blip on the NBA radar, Allen Iverson was an MVP.

Hellcrooner
09-19-2011, 11:10 PM
Where are all the knocks on Steve Nash's defense?

If AI gets the label of a poor defender, then Steve Nash might as well equal a 5 on 4 in favor of the opposition when he's on defense.


Steve Nash got to play with prime Dirk, prime Marion, prime Stoudemire and never made it as far as AI did with a group of castoffs from other teams.

AI was one of the most difficult players EVER to defend. Like I said in another thread, the only person that could stop AI was himself. The guy could get any shot on the court he wanted, and was simply unguardable during his prime.

His 33ppg average in the 2001 playoffs is something that only Hakeem and MJ were able to do in as many games played in a single postseason.

Not that Steve Nash isn't tough, but AI put his body through more abuse than any player I can remember seeing. The guy is the definition of tough, and despite what many posters on this site think, he's one of the most respected players to ever play the game.

By the time Steve Nash made a blip on the NBA radar, Allen Iverson was an MVP.
because it is the same to run into shaq, duncan, kobe, dirk, pau,Kg, robinson,webber, peja etc year after year than run into....wince carter!!!!! Mad dog RObinson!!!!! the incrfedibel mariachis from hell !!!!woooooooooooo

Stuckey#3
09-19-2011, 11:14 PM
The votes/posts don't add up. This should be screened for BS accounts.

Hellcrooner
09-20-2011, 12:17 AM
The votes/posts don't add up. This should be screened for BS accounts.

checked-.

No suspicious accounts voting for either Nash nor Iverson.

Hustlenomics
09-20-2011, 01:01 AM
^ Check this guys private messages

Stuckey#3
09-20-2011, 01:35 AM
^ Check this guys private messages

Damn... well that's what i get for considering that a sports forum/moderators had integrity.

It just goes to show that the entire PSD Top 50 thing is a joke. Corrupted. Some of these ****ers should intern for Karl Rove.

Hellcrooner
09-20-2011, 02:54 AM
^

1 vm not = Pm

2 Im not a mod.

3 there isnt anything there that i havent said here, i ahve MANY players over Iverson in my list, so if the option is lose my vote and iverson getting over a ton of more deserving players, i d rather vote for a dude that i think is moree worhty than him .

would i prefer reed or walton or worhty here? yep, nash? i cosnider him beter than AI so whatever.

bagwell368
09-20-2011, 07:03 AM
The votes/posts don't add up. This should be screened for BS accounts.

I voted for Nash, I didn't make a post, I've talked before on Nash, and more on AI. There are at least 75 more players I'd put above AI. People forget that we aren't voting for a 1 on 1 player, but a guy that plays a 5 on 5 game. AI was constitutionally unable/unwilling to raise his team with his play, he had an uncanny ability to gum up the workings of a team on and off the floor.

I don't hate AI, I loathe him as a counter example of everything I was coached in middle school/HS/college, and everything I coached the last 13 years. Sue me.

alencp3
09-20-2011, 07:48 AM
i dont think iverson will ever win this **** is hilarious

mightybosstone
09-20-2011, 11:40 AM
^ Check this guys private messages

Damn... well that's what i get for considering that a sports forum/moderators had integrity.
It just goes to show that the entire PSD Top 50 thing is a joke. Corrupted. Some of these ****ers should intern for Karl Rove.
It's a poll on an online sports forum. Get over yourselves. As "corrupt" as you guys think this is, it's no worse than the countless homers who vote without any research on topics whatsoever.


I voted for Nash, I didn't make a post, I've talked before on Nash, and more on AI. There are at least 75 more players I'd put above AI. People forget that we aren't voting for a 1 on 1 player, but a guy that plays a 5 on 5 game. AI was constitutionally unable/unwilling to raise his team with his play, he had an uncanny ability to gum up the workings of a team on and off the floor.

I don't hate AI, I loathe him as a counter example of everything I was coached in middle school/HS/college, and everything I coached the last 13 years. Sue me.
I'll admit that this is too early for Iverson, but I don't think for a second that there are 75 better players than him. The guy was an MVP (maybe it wasn't completely deserved, but you don't win one if you're not a top 5 player), a 4x scoring champion, a 7x All-NBA player (3 first, 3 second, 1 third) and carried a defensive minded Philly team with no other offensive weapons to speak of to three games short of an NBA championship.

Yes, he's an incredibly inefficient player, but if that is your only argument, then I think Mikan and Havlicek should be much lower, because they weren't exactly efficient players offensively, either. And I don't necessarily think a player's off the court issues should be a factor here, unless they were a cancer to his team. And I don't think you could convince me that he was ever a cancer in Philly

millerandco
09-20-2011, 01:13 PM
hands down a.i

nash is 38th

millerandco
09-20-2011, 01:15 PM
nominate: Dennis the worm Rodman

Hellcrooner
09-20-2011, 01:25 PM
^
there are no more nominations.

ShakeN'Bake
09-20-2011, 02:53 PM
^
there are no more nominations.

And yet Penny, Grant and Tim were all added on the poll.

Jordansbulls shouldn't just be adding players he thinks should be on the poll, if he is adding players it should go back to nominations.

Unless Penny, Grant and Tim were all on the poll before #36 and some how just got left off and now re-added..if that's the case I apologize.

Swashcuff
09-20-2011, 02:57 PM
And yet Penny, Grant and Tim were all added on the poll.

Jordansbulls shouldn't just be adding players he thinks should be on the poll, if he is adding players it should go back to nominations.

Unless Penny, Grant and Tim were all on the poll before #36 and some how just got left off and now re-added..if that's the case I apologize.

They weren't

Hell Penny even received a vote when he shouldn't have even been on the poll.

Hellcrooner
09-20-2011, 03:27 PM
imo this should be reestarted from scratch.


first go positional polls, then the all time poll using a SIMILAR ( BUT CORRECTED) version of what MHC is doing with the top 10 ( instead of just have the top positional voted remaining option for each position have the 3 more position voted remaining at the 5 positions) 15 options instead of 5, in simple words.

SteBO
09-20-2011, 07:52 PM
Next poll will be up in a bit......