PDA

View Full Version : PSD's Official #43 NBA Player of All-Time



JordansBulls
10-01-2011, 06:19 PM
Voting for #42 has concluded and PSD's Official #42 NBA Player of all time is....

Dominique Wilkins

Top 2 Voting:

Dominique Wilkins = 8 votes
Reggie Miller = 6 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)
37. Allen Iverson (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=653515)
38. Steve Nash (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=654056)
39. Bill Walton (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=654694)
40. George Gervin (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=655171)
41. Willis Reed (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=655768)
42. Dominique Wilkins (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=656588)


Voting will now begin for the #43 NBA Player All Time


These are the players that can be voted for the #43 spot.


Sam Jones
Wes Unseld
Dave Cowens
Bob Mcadoo
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
Anfernee Hardaway
Tim Hardaway
Grant Hill

PinnacleFlash
10-01-2011, 06:31 PM
Worthy, btw JB I like this ranking system better because we get everybody's votes and not just a group of wanna be elitists like the other site does.

PinnacleFlash
10-01-2011, 06:32 PM
JB, you should Ray Allen to the list because he was better than Miller and Dennis Johnson too.

Hustlenomics
10-01-2011, 06:33 PM
Paul Pierce

KnicksorBust
10-01-2011, 08:34 PM
I meant to vote Mac.

Swashcuff
10-01-2011, 09:15 PM
Worthy, btw JB I like this ranking system better because we get everybody's votes and not just a group of wanna be elitists like the other site does.

The same site that recently permabanned you :speechless:

PinnacleFlash
10-01-2011, 09:18 PM
The same site that recently permabanned you :speechless:
Um. no.

Chacarron
10-01-2011, 11:44 PM
Big Game James Worthy.

JordansBulls
10-02-2011, 09:13 AM
I took Sam Jones. Integral part of the Dynasty Celtics who many times was there leading scorer and led in a Win Shares a few times.

Knick Killer
10-02-2011, 02:27 PM
Worthy is not better than Webber or Kemp. He has 3 rings because he played with Magic, Kareem and all the others... That's Showtime Lakers, that was a great team but they're not all top 50 players!

Greet
10-02-2011, 04:06 PM
Didn't vote. I don't see Derrick Rose anywhere?

AntiG
10-02-2011, 08:22 PM
Pierce.

SugeKnight
10-03-2011, 12:28 AM
Nate Thurmond

AntiG
10-03-2011, 09:51 AM
Worthy is not better than Webber or Kemp. He has 3 rings because he played with Magic, Kareem and all the others... That's Showtime Lakers, that was a great team but they're not all top 50 players!

Pierce >>>> Kemp > Webber > Worthy.

Ebbs
10-03-2011, 10:45 AM
T-Mac and Pierce are the best 2 players left on the poll IMO. But I'll take Reggie over worthy.

mightybosstone
10-03-2011, 11:46 AM
How is no one voting for Dave Cowens? Do you guys even know who he is?

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/cowenda01.html

That's seven consecutive all-star games, an MVP, two championships, three all-nba and three all-defensive teams while consistently averaging 16-18 points, 12-14 rebounds, 3-4 assists, a steal and a block in a seven year span. What other players on this poll can boast that kind of dominance?

Chronz
10-03-2011, 02:55 PM
Reggie or Worthy? WTF are you guys doing, Im voting Pierce on the off chance that maybe he can get enough love to surpass either of these glorified role players.

JordansBulls
10-03-2011, 02:58 PM
Reggie or Worthy? WTF are you guys doing, Im voting Pierce on the off chance that maybe he can get enough love to surpass either of these glorified role players.

Probably should have stopped it at 40.

Chronz
10-03-2011, 03:06 PM
lol Im not 100% serious, its just a public poll anyways, keep it going till the lockout ends brah

ShakeN'Bake
10-03-2011, 03:20 PM
lol Im not 100% serious, its just a public poll anyways, keep it going till the lockout ends brah

yes, the PSD top 200 All-time list...so stoked!

mightybosstone
10-03-2011, 03:36 PM
Reggie or Worthy? WTF are you guys doing, Im voting Pierce on the off chance that maybe he can get enough love to surpass either of these glorified role players.

Yeah, it's clear that nobody does ANY research for these votes. How can you randomly pick one player out of 20 if you don't even know what the players have accomplished? Miller cracking the top 50 would be a travesty, and while I'd be fine with Worthy in the top 50, there are just better players available right now, IMO.

Chronz
10-03-2011, 04:07 PM
yes, the PSD top 200 All-time list...so stoked!

HAH we can do an over/under type of bet on the list to spice things up if you like

KnicksorBust
10-03-2011, 06:26 PM
Nominate: Dave Debusschere

I actually liked JB's idea of saying your votes in the thread. I think that would improve the quality of the list.

Lakersfan2483
10-03-2011, 08:07 PM
Paul Pierce.

JordansBulls
10-03-2011, 08:14 PM
Probably going to keep this open another 2 days as it is a 3 horse race.

pd7631
10-03-2011, 08:28 PM
Reggie or Worthy? WTF are you guys doing, Im voting Pierce on the off chance that maybe he can get enough love to surpass either of these glorified role players.

Reggie Miller a glorified role player? He is the all time face of the Pacers franchise. He's also arguably the greatest shooter ever, and outside of MJ probably the greatest clutch shooter of all time. Reggie not only was the best player on those Pacer teams of the 90's, but was also their unquestioned leader. He had a good but not great supporting cast, and if he had one other great player at his side, I think he gets over the hump.

The best players he ever got to play with were, Mark Jackson, Rik Smits, and Jalen Rose.

Chronz
10-03-2011, 08:56 PM
Reggie Miller a glorified role player? He is the all time face of the Pacers franchise. He's also arguably the greatest shooter ever, and outside of MJ probably the greatest clutch shooter of all time. Reggie not only was the best player on those Pacer teams of the 90's, but was also their unquestioned leader. He had a good but not great supporting cast, and if he had one other great player at his side, I think he gets over the hump.

The best players he ever got to play with were, Mark Jackson, Rik Smits, and Jalen Rose.

Yes he is the face of a franchise, of what relevance is that here? Him being clutch is gospel by now so you dont need to lecture me on this, in all seriousness you hardly strike me as an expert at measuring All-Time clutchness anyways so lets skip the hyperbole.
I will grant you that if I wanted a player to win me a close game, Reggie would bounce up above quite a few legends (even some top 20 guys). Thing is I'm not interested in just scraping by, I put more weight on their impact on the outcome of the game as a WHOLE. I want the best possible player to win me the game, not just in the closing moments but securing victories long before then. Be honest man, how many clutch chances did Reggie get and how often did he lose in spite of them, you have to admit he lost more than he hit game winners so obviously "clutch" play accounts for less of his career worth. The mere fact that a key strength of your argument is based on such a minuscule aspect of his career only tells me how poor of a resume Reggie has.

As for Reggie being the best player on his team, so what, who was the best player on the Championship Bullets team? Why arent you voting for him? I disagree with your opinion on Reggie's supporting cast, the fact that you mentioned Jalen tells me you underrate the impact the Davis boys had defensively for a team that couldnt have been so good by Reggie's doing. And if you agree that they are atleast arguably better than Jalen, then your only exposing just how talented that team was, their top 6-7 players were all worthy of playing time. Reggie was his teams best player, but he was not a transcendent player at ANY point in his career. His team was a contender a few years (even limiting MJ/Pip) due to the overall quality of the unit, Reggie was the biggest cog but he was never even a perennial All-Star, inexcusable for someone challenging a former MVP/Champ the whole enchilada. If Reggie has another great player (setting the default selection on a guy who made All-Star teams regularly) then the odds are they will cease to be Reggie's Team. Notch the barometer up to multiple All-NBA then its definitely not Reggies team. THATS THE POINT.

The case for Reggie has never been how great he was a player but HOW LONG HE LASTED. Its not unfair for me to say a clearly superior player wins a title with the support Reggie had, he wasnt that good of a player. The case you must make is convince the person why its better to not win a title but be a fringe contender for longer.

Hustlenomics
10-03-2011, 09:13 PM
how is reggie miller better than Pierce

JLynn943
10-03-2011, 09:43 PM
How is Pierce better than Webber?

Chronz
10-04-2011, 12:54 AM
How is Pierce better than Webber?

Not at his peak but it gets subjective when you weigh how long they were in their prime

Knick Killer
10-04-2011, 04:38 AM
how is reggie miller better than Pierce
Ask to Kobe...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mKCxkJTFrU

Cano4prez
10-04-2011, 06:12 AM
Ask to Kobe...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mKCxkJTFrU

Ok? and if you have ask Wade he'd probably say Ray Allen. Pierce is much better than Miller..

Knick Killer
10-04-2011, 07:03 AM
If you look at team success, Reggie is way better. Pacers were always at the top of the Eastern Conference standings with Miller. But before Allen and Garnett, Celtics was sucks. Miller was never be a part of big 3,4 or anything like that. He didn't play with other stars. He always against them. Jordan, Shaq, Kobe, Wade, Pippen, Ewing, Payton, Kidd, Iverson, Wilkins, Pierce... Sometimes he won, sometimes he lost but he always give them a great competition and made all playoff series "unforgettable" for the fans.

bagwell368
10-04-2011, 06:08 PM
how is reggie miller better than Pierce

Good question.

How is Pierce better then:

Sam Jones
Billups
KJ
Bob Lanier

and BTW, Miller > Pierce

Hell he might not even be better then Bobby Jones (well OK, he is, but by a lot less then most think). Gasol is lurking around this question too.

Hustlenomics
10-04-2011, 10:16 PM
^ How is Miller a better PLAYER than Pierce? We know he's a better shooter

bagwell368
10-04-2011, 11:25 PM
^ How is Miller a better PLAYER than Pierce? We know he's a better shooter

Millers peak 12 year span he was a great player for 11 years.

Pierces peak 11 year span he was a great player for 8 years.

Miller isn't just a better shooter then Pierce, he's distinctly better.

Pierce is a better defender.

Per game, it's fairly even in the regular season (because Miller's career went so long, let's see what it looks like when Pierce is done, his per game rates will go down), but the flip side:

Miller also played over 400 more regular season games (and 34 more playoff games) then Pierce.

Speaking of playoffs Miller had a greater impact/played better in the playoffs then Pierce. Pierces last two playoff games were utter fails down the stretch, a very bad taste indeed to be talking about elevating him above his station. IMO, he shouldn't again come up for 4-8 more slots.

naps
10-05-2011, 12:29 AM
Chris Webber. Dude was amazing in his prime. He would be having a championship and finals MVP by now if it was not for the refs.

bagwell368
10-05-2011, 07:52 AM
Chris Webber. Dude was amazing in his prime. He would be having a championship and finals MVP by now if it was not for the refs.

I dunno. After he left Michigan I was convinced he would be great. He has one of the best hands of any guy his size or bigger I ever saw, but, somehow he never seemed to get to that intensity level that I associate with greatness. He seemed somehow content. I like content when I see Bill Russell's face years after he retired, I want to see the look in his eye, or Jordan's, or Kobe when they were chasing titles.

He missed a lot of games too, with years such as:

54, 15, 42, 54, 23, 9

games played.

He was a borderline crappy FT% shooter as well. Nope. Premature to talk Webber here. He's not even up to Pierce level, so that means what 10-15 slots from here.

bagwell368
10-05-2011, 07:57 AM
Unseld?

By far is the greatest outlet passer of all time IMO (pass while still in the air off the bound, sometimes 3/4 court). He had six really good years through age 29. He had one good year after that. He was NEVER great in any given year, except on D a couple of years. His O was meh, even for back then.

His MVP is probably the weakest MVP year on record, certainly in the bottom 3. If the ABA didn't exist his numbers would have been worse.

He's at least 15 if not 20 slots down from here.

Chronz
10-05-2011, 11:50 AM
Millers peak 12 year span he was a great player for 11 years.

Pierces peak 11 year span he was a great player for 8 years.
How can you tell? Both players were so consistent throughout their careers. Its really hard to tell when they peaked and when they finally stopped playing at that level.

Still Im not understanding your terms here, how can a player have a peak run but not be as great during any one of those years? A players PEAK should coincide with his own greatness. The PEAK years of a great player should be his greatest years. Im guessing you mean their top 11-12 seasons period but lets do the math.

Assuming you discount Reggie's first 2 years because he wasnt yet named to an All-Star team, wasnt making the playoffs, and failed to produce like one. His final days as an All-Star, in name, came the year he made the Finals in 2000, but he continued that level of production even after that phase.
So you can probably stretch his Prime Run to 2002 when he was 36 years old. The problem is, from a regular season standpoint, Reggie never truly had a decline phase, even what we would consider his decline phase was relatively close to the player he was in his prime. Some argue Reggie's farewell season was his most impressive when you consider the leadership role he carried with all the injuries/suspensions given that year.
That Reggie took on more of a load in terms of usage/minutes at an age where they should have been cut back yet displayed no loss in his play tells me theres an argument for him never really seeing the end of his prime. He was just as good at 39 as he was at 23. Obviously not as good as his PEAK run but as Ive alluded to, its really hard to pinpoint when his peak run ended.

When this happens I like to choose the last year in which a players game translates into the post season, meaning little to no slippage.

I sometimes find that even when players hit their last legs as a regular season performer, they have that 1(or more) final playoff run where they look like they could have done that all year if they had the legs for it, that marks the final days as a star.
Or I find players who can still produce during the regular season near the level they did in their prime, but come playoff time, they are no longer able to raise their level of play.

For instance with Tmac his first year with Houston wasnt better than his 2003 season but that playoff series was his best ever. For me, that series marked Tmacs final days as a superstar, he was able to continue a strong level of play so arguably still in his Prime but clearly past his Peak.

In Reggie's case his final days as a Reggie type playoff performer came in 2002. That marked his last year with great playoff #'s so it seems like a fair end point. So 1990 to 2002 marks a 13 year prime run, the 11-PEAK years your referring to had to have come in the span of 1990-2000.



Now lets compare those marks to Pierce. Pierce wasnt named an All-Star as early or as late as Reggie but he made MANY more teams. Given that we know Reggie didnt have many peaks and valleys in his career we can conclude the reason he didnt make the All-Star team had nothing to do with his own abilities as a player, the voters simply felt there were better decisions to be made (which was wrong). Similarly Pierce was basically an All-Star from day 1, his level of production wasnt that different from when he actually made it the biggest difference was the teams level of play. Its no coincidence he finally made the team the year he finally made the playoffs, team success had everything to do with that decision. Going from his rookie season till now marks 13 years, if you want to take away his first 2 seasons he has an equal # of Prime Years. On par with Reggie and hes not even done with his career.


Miller isn't just a better shooter then Pierce, he's distinctly better.

Pierce is a better defender.

Per game, it's fairly even in the regular season (because Miller's career went so long, let's see what it looks like when Pierce is done, his per game rates will go down), but the flip side:

Miller also played over 400 more regular season (and 34 more playoff games) then Pierce.

Speaking of playoffs Miller had a greater impact/played better in the playoffs then Pierce. Pierces last two playoff games were utter fails down the stretch, a very bad taste indeed to be talking about elevating him above his station. IMO, he shouldn't again come up for 4-8 more slots.

Can you explain how he has the greater impact when Pierce has the Ring and the Finals MVP to back it up, Reggie has more playoff games, but why would anyone hold it against Pierce for playing with kids and missing the playoffs? When both were arguably their teams best player they both had 5 long playoff runs, the advantage Reggie has is that he had more 1 and done runs and has obviously played longer.

Pierce's playoff exploits translated to a championship, you can cite his teammates but why wouldnt you do the same when mentioning playoff games played? Which one is more important? I would rather see Pierce in the Tmac category a few spots down the road but both of them best Reggie IMO.

bagwell368
10-05-2011, 12:41 PM
How can you tell? Both players were so consistent throughout their careers. Its really hard to tell when they peaked and when they finally stopped playing at that level.

Still Im not understanding your terms here, how can a player have a peak run but not be as great during any one of those years? A players PEAK should coincide with his own greatness. The PEAK years of a great player should be his greatest years. Im guessing you mean their top 11-12 seasons period but lets do the math.

You can have a broad peak, and have non peak years within it, at least IMO.

Most of the rest of your post is excellent, I can agree with almost all of it.

I do not however see PP being nailed for being a volume scorer, and not really extending himself to play D until 2007 when KG and Coach T showed up.


Can you explain how he has the greater impact when Pierce has the Ring and the Finals MVP to back it up, Reggie has more playoff games, but why would anyone hold it against Pierce for playing with kids and missing the playoffs?

Hold on, you want to reward PP for playing on a team that was transformed by his defensive coach and KG, a team that was better then any team Miller played for on one hand. A team that outside of his big performance against LAL, KG dragged that team to the title.

Then on the other you want to pump up PP for not having as many chances due to being on a bad team. A few of those teams were not that bad, where was PP's leadership/ability in getting to the playoffs?


When both were arguably their teams best player they both had 5 long playoff runs, the advantage Reggie has is that he had more 1 and done runs and has obviously played longer.

He did play longer and his decline wasn't that steep as you say, what will PP do in his decline? If you take HOF'ers from the #25-#50 slot and toss out the Centers, what does the decline look like? Miller is one of the best players into old age in NBA history. If PP has a more normal and lesser decline then Miller what will be the verdict then?


Pierce's playoff exploits translated to a championship, you can cite his teammates but why wouldnt you do the same when mentioning playoff games played? Which one is more important? I would rather see Pierce in the Tmac category a few spots down the road but both of them best Reggie IMO.

Well your opinion is worth a lot, but Pierce isn't better then Sam Jones, and others IMO, but Sam and others have no shot for this slot, Miller does, so I'm arguing Miller over PP.

And on balance Miller was better in each and every playoff game he played in then PP. Outside of 2007-2008 I never saw PP act or look like a a serious high end HOF'er. So IMO, it's an outlier due to his team and D coaching MORE then what PP did.

mightybosstone
10-05-2011, 01:20 PM
Unseld?

By far is the greatest outlet passer of all time IMO (pass while still in the air off the bound, sometimes 3/4 court). He had six really good years through age 29. He had one good year after that. He was NEVER great in any given year, except on D a couple of years. His O was meh, even for back then.

His MVP is probably the weakest MVP year on record, certainly in the bottom 3. If the ABA didn't exist his numbers would have been worse.

He's at least 15 if not 20 slots down from here.

Yeah. I've said it before and I'll say it again... Cowens is the pick here, and I'm shocked at the players who are being voted on ahead of him.

Mile High Champ
10-05-2011, 03:09 PM
Give me Reggie Milller here. Too many people hate on him for no good reason. The great Pacers teams that Miller played on were good teams but they were not on the same level as a lot of the other great teams we have talked baout so far. Miller had to do it alone often and was simply clutch in playoff time. Miller here for the win!

mightybosstone
10-05-2011, 05:05 PM
Give me Reggie Milller here. Too many people hate on him for no good reason. The great Pacers teams that Miller played on were good teams but they were not on the same level as a lot of the other great teams we have talked baout so far. Miller had to do it alone often and was simply clutch in playoff time. Miller here for the win!

God no. Miller averaged 23+ PPG only once in his entire career and a 21.6 career usage rate (187th in the history of the league, below Ron freaking Artest). Yeah, the guy was extremely efficient and one of the greatest shooters in the history of the league, but for a guy known for being a great scorer, those are not impressive numbers, especially since he never played on a team with a lot of other scoring options. He wasn't even the No. 1 option on the best Pacers team he every played on (the 99-00 team). Jalen Rose had a higher usage rate and PPG.

And, yes, he was a clutch shooter, but for every great game, he had an awful one nobody talks about. How about the 99 team that lost to the 8th seeded Knicks and Miller went 3-18 (7-8 from 3s) and scored eight points in game 6, which eliminated Indiana?

Or how about the fact that he only made five all-star games and three third-team all-nba teams in 16 seasons? Do you realize what that means? Miller was NEVER one of the 10 best players in the league when he played and was only considered one of the 15 best three out of 16 years. If he was barely good enough to be one of the 15 best players of his era, how in the hell can he be good enough to crack the top 50?

If we're considering wings, Sam Jones and Paul Pierce are MUCH better options at this point, and I think you could give serious consideration for T-Mac over Reggie. I'd also rather have Cowens (who I'm voting for), Mcadoo and Worthy.

KnicksorBust
10-05-2011, 05:11 PM
God no. Miller averaged 23+ PPG only once in his entire career and a 21.6 career usage rate (187th in the history of the league, below Ron freaking Artest). Yeah, the guy was extremely efficient and one of the greatest shooters in the history of the league, but for a guy known for being a great scorer, those are not impressive numbers, especially since he never played on a team with a lot of other scoring options. He wasn't even the No. 1 option on the best Pacers team he every played on (the 99-00 team). Jalen Rose had a higher usage rate and PPG.

And, yes, he was a clutch shooter, but for every great game, he had an awful one nobody talks about. How about the 99 team that lost to the 8th seeded Knicks and Miller went 3-18 (7-8 from 3s) and scored eight points in game 6, which eliminated Indiana?

Or how about the fact that he only made five all-star games and three third-team all-nba teams in 16 seasons? Do you realize what that means? Miller was NEVER one of the 10 best players in the league when he played and was only considered one of the 15 best three out of 16 years. If he was barely good enough to be one of the 15 best players of his era, how in the hell can he be good enough to crack the top 50?

If we're considering wings, Sam Jones and Paul Pierce are MUCH better options at this point, and I think you could give serious consideration for T-Mac over Reggie. I'd also rather have Cowens (who I'm voting for), Mcadoo and Worthy.

:clap:

There is just so much talent still out there that can do more than Miller. He was a below average passer, rebounder, and defender. Skills-wise he's not top 50 and accolades same thing. MBT is spot on pointing out the All-NBA Teams.

I prefer McAdoo but I could easily see Cowens here as well.

bagwell368
10-05-2011, 05:47 PM
And, yes, he was a clutch shooter, but for every great game, he had an awful one nobody talks about. How about the 99 team that lost to the 8th seeded Knicks and Miller went 3-18 (7-8 from 3s) and scored eight points in game 6, which eliminated Indiana?

Every guy that shoots a lot has bad games. What do the shooting percentages say about his career, he was friggin great, that's what.


Or how about the fact that he only made five all-star games and three third-team all-nba teams in 16 seasons? Do you realize what that means? Miller was NEVER one of the 10 best players in the league when he played and was only considered one of the 15 best three out of 16 years. If he was barely good enough to be one of the 15 best players of his era, how in the hell can he be good enough to crack the top 50?

You actually take MVP votes seriously as ranking tools? You lost me on that. BTW what about being 15 best during his era - a few times, an era of more teams and far more talent then what Cowens dealt with? What about the shortness of Cowens career and peak? You think Cowens would have been top 15 in Miller's era? I have big doubts, and he was my favorite Celt from the time he was a rookie until Bird showed up, I even styled my game on his.


If we're considering wings, Sam Jones and Paul Pierce are MUCH better options at this point, and I think you could give serious consideration for T-Mac over Reggie. I'd also rather have Cowens (who I'm voting for), Mcadoo and Worthy.

McAdoo's was great at age 22-23, and real good at 24-26, but he was an offensive near zero from age 28-34, and overall a shell of a player from 27-34. He's about a #55 IMO.

I agree on Jones, he may be the best player not in yet, if not, he's top 4 left.

But the argument I took on is PP vs. Miller, and I like Miller over PP.

Hustlenomics
10-05-2011, 05:57 PM
Millers peak 12 year span he was a great player for 11 years.

Pierces peak 11 year span he was a great player for 8 years.

Miller isn't just a better shooter then Pierce, he's distinctly better.

Pierce is a better defender.

Per game, it's fairly even in the regular season (because Miller's career went so long, let's see what it looks like when Pierce is done, his per game rates will go down), but the flip side:

Miller also played over 400 more regular season games (and 34 more playoff games) then Pierce.

Speaking of playoffs Miller had a greater impact/played better in the playoffs then Pierce. Pierces last two playoff games were utter fails down the stretch, a very bad taste indeed to be talking about elevating him above his station. IMO, he shouldn't again come up for 4-8 more slots.

speaking of playoffs who won a championship as the man

bagwell368
10-05-2011, 07:59 PM
speaking of playoffs who won a championship as the man

Without our defensive coach and KG, Ray Allen, Powe, Posey and Brown getting added - career disappointment PP (given the Celts lineage) wouldn't have had a sniff at the LAL in the Finals. The "man"? In your eyes maybe. The Celts very deep 10 man team was the real man - led by KG, not PP. To me he shoots too much, flops too much, AND is the worst "great player" in NBA history with the rock in his hands with 9 seconds before the clock goes off to end the game. Fallway 24' off balance shot with 2 seconds left is a frequent result.

How did he do against the Heat down the stretch of the last two games this year? He was confused, showed poor judgement on shot selection, giving fouls, and passes. In short he sucked in every almost every facet of the game when he was needed. Some Captain.

You want to put him over Miller for playing really well for 5 out of 6 games in one Series? He played poorly against Detroit in 4 out of 7 games in the prior series, and only had 3 notable games against Atlanta in the Series before that. KG in fact had a better playoff run then PP did by a good deal, even Allen arguably outplayed PP in the playoffs. Posey per minute also trounced PP. As a Celtic fan on PSD that goes back a lot further then most I just want it to be clear. Pierce is the 3rd best #3 in Celtic history - and in '08 he was one of the big 3, but KG led that group clearly, not Captain PP.

Certainly PP does not belong in front of Sam Jones, the number 1 #2 in Celts history. He was one of the two best players on the Celts 6 years in a row (on teams much deeper the PP's average team (Russell was the other), all Championship seasons. He was also a top player (#3-#5 range) in 3 other seasons. He actually placed well in rate stats, something PP hasn't done. Jones is 33rd in WS/48, PP 58th and that doesn't include his full decline. Jones with Russell the MVP vacuum cleaner right next do him did bettter in MVP voting then PP has done.

Ironic that someone should make such a big deal over PP's 1 ring, when Jones won 10 in 12 years, 9 of those titles as a key player. Where is the love? Oh yeah, forgot, he's ancient history.

Pierce doesn't belong here, and not for another 3-5 slots at least. If he gets here it'll be ballot stuffing by mostly Celts fans and/or people unfamiliar with earlier NBA greats IMO.

mightybosstone
10-06-2011, 11:20 AM
Every guy that shoots a lot has bad games. What do the shooting percentages say about his career, he was friggin great, that's what.
But I'm not talking about his ability as a shooter, I'm talking about a flawed logic that he was consistently "clutch." If he was that great a 4th quarter shooter or as good a scorer as people believe him to be, the Pacers would have won a championship.


You actually take MVP votes seriously as ranking tools? You lost me on that. BTW what about being 15 best during his era - a few times, an era of more teams and far more talent then what Cowens dealt with? What about the shortness of Cowens career and peak? You think Cowens would have been top 15 in Miller's era? I have big doubts, and he was my favorite Celt from the time he was a rookie until Bird showed up, I even styled my game on his.
I'm pretty sure I was referencing All-NBA teams and not the MVP. But,yeah, Cowens did win an MVP and was one of best defensive players of his era (whereas Reggie was a notoriously bad defender). And if you want to argue talent, look at the All-NBA teams in 72-73 (when Cowens won MVP)...

Guards: Tiny Archibald (his greatest season), Jerry West, Walt Frazier, Pete Maravich
Forwards: John Havlicek, Spencer Haywood, Rick Barry, Elvin Hayes
Centers: Kareem, Cowens

Now compare that to the guards that were on the 94-95, 95-96 and 97-98 All-NBA teams... Jordan, Stockton and Payton are all givens and clearly great players of their era. But how about an ancient Clyde Drexler, Penny Hardaway, Tim Hardaway, Mitch Richmond and Rod Strickland (who was actually ahead of Miller, on the 2nd team in 97-98).

If Miller is such an unbelievable player, then why did the Hardaways, Richmond and Rod Strickland get more love than he did? Because he was never that prolific a scorer and he was an atrocious defender.


McAdoo's was great at age 22-23, and real good at 24-26, but he was an offensive near zero from age 28-34, and overall a shell of a player from 27-34. He's about a #55 IMO.
Just because a guy deal's with injuries over the second half of his career does not completely cancel out the things he did in the first half. He was a great player in the 70s and a solid role player on those Lakers teams in the early 80s. I'd rather have him here than Miller, whose peak should not be spoken in the same sentence as McAdoo's...


But the argument I took on is PP vs. Miller, and I like Miller over PP.
Look at their careers and tell me that Reggie Miller was a better player. Paul Pierce is better at LITERALLY everything else aside from shooting, and the dude's gotten pretty good at that these past few years. He's a much better defender, better overall scorer and has better numbers in nearly every other statistical category (rebounds, assists, steals). Reggie has a slight edge in WS/48, but Pierce has actually improved in that category over the past few seasons and it would not surprise me to see him end up with a career .180 WS/48. And Pierce's postseason heroics are every bit as epic as Millers. His 41 against James' 45 in Game 7 of the EC Finals is still maybe the greatest one on one matchup I've ever seen in a postseason game.

Miller was a great player, and I'm not saying he wouldn't crack my top 100. Hell, he'd probably crack my top 60. But he's not a better player than Paul Pierce. He's certainly not a better player than Dave Cowens. And he DEFINITELY does not belong at No. 43.

mightybosstone
10-06-2011, 11:22 AM
For the record, my current top 3 is:

1. Cowens
2. Jones
3. McAdoo

I haven't thought further ahead than that...

bagwell368
10-06-2011, 11:51 AM
But I'm not talking about his ability as a shooter, I'm talking about a flawed logic that he was consistently "clutch." If he was that great a 4th quarter shooter or as good a scorer as people believe him to be, the Pacers would have won a championship.

I never said that he was clutch. He was a very dangerous shooter for a long time.


I'm pretty sure I was referencing All-NBA teams and not the MVP.

My bad typo, those Awards are likewise suspect - certainly not ipso facto proof.


But,yeah, Cowens did win an MVP and was one of best defensive players of his era (whereas Reggie was a notoriously bad defender). And if you want to argue talent, look at the All-NBA teams in 72-73 (when Cowens won MVP)...

Look, Cowens was my favorite player on the planet for like 9 years, I was his size, and patterned my game after him. I know what the deal is on Cowens better than almost anybody that has ever posted in this board.

I prefer defensive players over offensive ones as a rule. I'm arguing Miller over Pierce - so I must be sold.

The All NBA team was fairly strong, what about the 2nd and 3rd tier guys? Not as strong as they could have been - clearly.


Guards: Tiny Archibald (his greatest season), Jerry West, Walt Frazier, Pete Maravich
Forwards: John Havlicek, Spencer Haywood, Rick Barry, Elvin Hayes
Centers: Kareem, Cowens


Jerry West was an old man getting a lifetime achievement award - he was a lame choice.
Maravich was totally overrated, easily a worse defender then Miller.
Haywood had his insane rookie year in the ABA and was a meh NBA star, certainly not elite.
Tiny was easy to post up, I know I used to play against him at BCH in the '81-'82 time frame.


Now compare that to the guards that were on the 94-95, 95-96 and 97-98 All-NBA teams... Jordan, Stockton and Payton are all givens and clearly great players of their era. But how about an ancient Clyde Drexler, Penny Hardaway, Tim Hardaway, Mitch Richmond and Rod Strickland (who was actually ahead of Miller, on the 2nd team in 97-98).

Drexler is the weakest guy on this list and he crushes the West you brought up. If I had to pick a team, Maravich is the next lowest guy besides West.


If Miller is such an unbelievable player, then why did the Hardaways, Richmond and Rod Strickland get more love than he did? Because he was never that prolific a scorer and he was an atrocious defender.

Because voters are human, and make mistakes like you proposing that Jerry West is actually a plus for that team or in comparison to Miller of the years you listed - LOL.


Just because a guy deal's with injuries over the second half of his career does not completely cancel out the things he did in the first half. He was a great player in the 70s and a solid role player on those Lakers teams in the early 80s. I'd rather have him here than Miller, whose peak should not be spoken in the same sentence as McAdoo's...

What sort of peak? McAdoo had a big early peak, he was also the only viable option that they had, that tends to pump up the stats. Also he played and peaked at a time of generally weak #4/#5 play in the NBA. Millers league year in and year out was tougher at his position.


Look at their careers and tell me that Reggie Miller was a better player. Paul Pierce is better at LITERALLY everything else aside from shooting, and the dude's gotten pretty good at that these past few years.

I did, read my posts. Me, the AFAIK Celt fan with the most seasons under my belt as a fan says that Miller was better then Pierce. You don't agree, great. I know others that don't either. And?


He's a much better defender, better overall scorer and has better numbers in nearly every other statistical category

Volume scorer with meh percentages. Never really played much D until KG showed up either.


Reggie has a slight edge in WS/48, but Pierce has actually improved in that category over the past few seasons and it would not surprise me to see him end up with a career .180 WS/48.

That's an unsupportable assertion IMO. I expect him to go down a good .003-.007 from his current number by the end of his career (which would tend to be supported by historical norms). I'd bet you anything that PP will not finish with a career .180 WS or better - that's an extreme improvement, he'd need what 4 years in a row of .200 to get that? That will not happen - either the injuries will stop him, or worse for his case dull his abilities but he'll continue to pick off counting stats and his rate stats will go to hell.


And Pierce's postseason heroics are every bit as epic as Millers. His 41 against James' 45 in Game 7 of the EC Finals is still maybe the greatest one on one matchup I've ever seen in a postseason game.

There is that one game thing again. Nice game. Lesser career


Miller was a great player, and I'm not saying he wouldn't crack my top 100. Hell, he'd probably crack my top 60. But he's not a better player than Paul Pierce. He's certainly not a better player than Dave Cowens. And he DEFINITELY does not belong at No. 43.

Cowens isn't in the running at #43 on PSD, so its an argument that is off the table IMO. I think Sam Jones should get this slot, but by the time I got here the voting was well along, and I decided to choose between those that might win.