PDA

View Full Version : PSD's Official #44 NBA Player of All-Time



JordansBulls
10-07-2011, 04:46 PM
Voting for #43 has concluded and PSD's Official #43 NBA Player of all time is....

Reggie Miller

Top 2 Voting:

Reggie Miller = 13 votes
James Worthy = 11 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)
43. Reggie Miller (http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=657146)



Voting will now begin for the #44 NBA Player All Time


These are the players that can be voted for the #44 spot.


Sam Jones
Wes Unseld
Dave Cowens
Bob Mcadoo
James Worthy
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

JordansBulls
10-07-2011, 04:50 PM
VOTE: 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
10-07-2011, 04:52 PM
Minutes Played: 50000 (more than the other 21 players in the poll)
All Star Games: 12 (more than the other 20 players in the poll, equal with one)
Championships: 1 (1978-Washington Bullets)
1978 Playoff Stats PG: 21.8 points, 13.3 rebaunds, 2.0 assists, 2.5 blocks, 1.5 steals.
Career Stats Per Game: 21.0 points, 12.5 rebaunds, 1.8 assists, 2.0 blocks, 1.0 steals.
All-NBA 1st Team: 3 (1975, 1977, 1979)
All-NBA 2nd Team: 3 (1973, 1974, 1976)

Vote: Elvin Hayes

Chronz
10-07-2011, 05:05 PM
Minutes Played: 50000 (more than the other 21 players in the poll)
All Star Games: 12 (more than the other 20 players in the poll, equal with one)
Championships: 1 (1978-Washington Bullets)
1978 Playoff Stats PG: 21.8 points, 13.3 rebaunds, 2.0 assists, 2.5 blocks, 1.5 steals.
Career Stats Per Game: 21.0 points, 12.5 rebaunds, 1.8 assists, 2.0 blocks, 1.0 steals.
All-NBA 1st Team: 3 (1975, 1977, 1979)
All-NBA 2nd Team: 3 (1973, 1974, 1976)

Vote: Elvin Hayes

At least your consistent with your horrible decisions

Hustlenomics
10-07-2011, 05:39 PM
Paul Pierce

Ebbs
10-07-2011, 06:00 PM
T-mac please

bagwell368
10-07-2011, 08:13 PM
Pierce has no business going in before Sam Jones

Jones was a key player on teams that won 9 titles, he won another as a rookie - for an even 10. Jones was the best or 2nd best player on the Celts six years in a row, the other guy was Russell.

PP was another volume scorer that didn't play much defense, wasn't able to lead his teams anyplace, and needed an influx of:


KG (had a better year in season and playoffs)
Ray Allen
Posey
Powe
Brown
Davis
Coach T

to get the one ring.

Last year the Captain PP fell apart down the stretch of the last two games v the Heat. Poor shot selection, poor timing on fouls, ill advised and poor passes, and got his pocket picked. Generally punked.

McAdoo, Hayes, Unseld, Thurmond, Kemp, and Pierce are all guys I cannot see being voted here.

kozelkid
10-07-2011, 08:26 PM
Going with the Chief here. I like the combo of his prime and longevity more than the short prime of Tmac's. I gotta say I'm rather disappointed with PSD that Reggie actually got in the top 50. Inexcusable.

Korman12
10-07-2011, 08:28 PM
Jones.

Swashcuff
10-07-2011, 08:29 PM
JordansBulls why are you adding names to the list when you yourself said that nominations were closed?

I know you're going to ignore this like the many other posts in the previous threads the other posters made but I just thought I'd ensure that it catches your eye.

As for the thread topic.

Honestly the best player I see on that entire list is Tracy McGrady. He may not have had the longevity as others but in terms of peak no one there compares and as far as prime I think it's up there with the best of them.

I'll do a bit more digging then return to give my vote.

KnicksorBust
10-07-2011, 08:53 PM
Pierce has no business going in before Sam Jones

Jones was a key player on teams that won 9 titles, he won another as a rookie - for an even 10. Jones was the best or 2nd best player on the Celts six years in a row, the other guy was Russell.

PP was another volume scorer that didn't play much defense, wasn't able to lead his teams anyplace, and needed an influx of:


KG (had a better year in season and playoffs)
Ray Allen
Posey
Powe
Brown
Davis
Coach T

to get the one ring.

Last year the Captain PP fell apart down the stretch of the last two games v the Heat. Poor shot selection, poor timing on fouls, ill advised and poor passes, and got his pocket picked. Generally punked.

McAdoo, Hayes, Unseld, Thurmond, Kemp, and Pierce are all guys I cannot see being voted here.

How can you not see McAdoo going here? League MVP who is one of the most gifted offensive players of all-time and one of the best block/steal bigs of all-time.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=1&p1=mcadobo01&y1=1986&p2=jonessa01&y2=1969

OGMarkWahlberg
10-07-2011, 09:31 PM
Grant Hill .. could have been 1 of the greatest players of all time barring injury .. figured id show the man his respect here

bagwell368
10-07-2011, 09:51 PM
How can you not see McAdoo going here? League MVP who is one of the most gifted offensive players of all-time and one of the best block/steal bigs of all-time.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=1&p1=mcadobo01&y1=1986&p2=jonessa01&y2=1969

His peak was steep and short (2 years, 3 very good years too), also in an era of a weak NBA. He played for a weak team so he was the 1st option always. He was done as an elite player at age 26. He had injury issues/missed games (during his 8 year decline). Hung for a long time (8 years) throw in his crummy rookie year that's:

elite - 2 years
excellent - 1 year
very good - 2 years
meh - 9 years

Big steal and block years in 3 of his years. He was a big one going for the big play, he also got walked around while he was in mid air - A LOT then. Later on when he couldn't jump anymore he was a pretty good bench big for LAL. If he stayed healthy 5 more years he'd be top 30, but he didn't and he's not.

He's better then the other guys on my list at say #50+

RevisIsland
10-07-2011, 10:23 PM
I'd give it to Dave Cowens.

KnicksorBust
10-07-2011, 10:56 PM
His peak was steep and short (2 years, 3 very good years too), also in an era of a weak NBA. He played for a weak team so he was the 1st option always. He was done as an elite player at age 26. He had injury issues/missed games (during his 8 year decline). Hung for a long time (8 years) throw in his crummy rookie year that's:

elite - 2 years
excellent - 1 year
very good - 2 years
meh - 9 years

Big steal and block years in 3 of his years. He was a big one going for the big play, he also got walked around while he was in mid air - A LOT then. Later on when he couldn't jump anymore he was a pretty good bench big for LAL. If he stayed healthy 5 more years he'd be top 30, but he didn't and he's not.

He's better then the other guys on my list at say #50+

Honestly, I would say 5 elite. Years 2-6 are just disgusting. Elite scoring, rebounding, and turnover producing defense.

bagwell368
10-08-2011, 08:28 AM
Honestly, I would say 5 elite. Years 2-6 are just disgusting. Elite scoring, rebounding, and turnover producing defense.

Given your standards of "elite" I'd recheck on Lucas, Gilmore, Parish, KJ, and Gasol, Pierce, and Jones.

JordansBulls
10-08-2011, 09:06 AM
JordansBulls why are you adding names to the list when you yourself said that nominations were closed?

I know you're going to ignore this like the many other posts in the previous threads the other posters made but I just thought I'd ensure that it catches your eye.

As for the thread topic.

Honestly the best player I see on that entire list is Tracy McGrady. He may not have had the longevity as others but in terms of peak no one there compares and as far as prime I think it's up there with the best of them.

I'll do a bit more digging then return to give my vote.

I haven't added anyone for a while.

Knick Killer
10-08-2011, 09:07 AM
NBA ALL-TIME LEADERS

Total Minutes:
1. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar - 57,446 (2nd in our list)
2. Karl Malone - 54,852 (14th in our list)
3. Elvin Hayes - 50,000 (??)
4. Wilt Chamberlain - 47,859 (3rd in our list)
5. John Stockton - 47,764 (18th in our list)
6. Reggie Miller - 47,619 (43rd in our list)
7. Gary Payton - 47,117 (34th in our list)
8. Jason Kidd - 46,689 (35th in our list)
9. John Havlicek - 46,471 (24th in our list)
10. Robert Parish - 45,704 (??)

Total Points:
1. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar - 38,387 (2nd in our list)
2. Karl Malone - 36,928 (14th in our list)
3. Michael Jordan - 32,292 (1st in our list)
4. Wilt Chamberlain - 31,419 (3rd in our list)
5. Shaquille O'Neal - 28,596 (7th in our list)
6. Kobe Bryant - 27,868 (8th in our list)
7. Moses Malone - 27,409 (12th in our list)
8. Elvin Hayes - 27,313 (??)
9. Hakeem Olajuwon - 26,946 (9th in our list)
10. Oscar Robertson - 26,710 (11th in our list)

Total Rebounds:
1. Wilt Chamberlain - 23,924 (3rd in our list)
2. Bill Russell - 21,620 (5th in our list)
3. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar - 17,440 (2nd in our list)
4. Elvin Hayes - 16,279 (??)
5. Moses Malone - 16,212 (12th in our list)
6. Karl Malone - 14,968 (14th in our list)
7. Robert Parish - 14,715 (??)
8. Nate Thurmond - 14,464 (??)
9. Walt Bellamy - 14,241 (??)
10. Wes Unseld - 13,769 (??)

Swashcuff
10-08-2011, 09:10 AM
I haven't added anyone for a while.

You added Tim and Penny Hardaway and Grant Hill and when we asked you to take them off or at least take our nominations into consideration you refused.

KnicksorBust
10-08-2011, 09:16 AM
Given your standards of "elite" I'd recheck on Lucas, Gilmore, Parish, KJ, and Gasol, Pierce, and Jones.

The only one on that list who compares statistically is Kevin Johnson and we both know he doesn't belong here.

bagwell368
10-08-2011, 10:43 AM
The only one on that list who compares statistically is Kevin Johnson and we both know he doesn't belong here.

Gasol's peak is arguably better. Parish lacks the peak, but buries McAdoo in longevity and years as a great/very good player by a factor of over 2x.

Clearly you are a McAdoo fan. I saw the man play, in his prime and in his long decline. A fine player, perhaps worthy of #50-52, but there are simply better choices here.

Hustlenomics
10-08-2011, 11:21 AM
Pierce has no business going in before Sam Jones

Jones was a key player on teams that won 9 titles, he won another as a rookie - for an even 10. Jones was the best or 2nd best player on the Celts six years in a row, the other guy was Russell.

PP was another volume scorer that didn't play much defense, wasn't able to lead his teams anyplace, and needed an influx of:


KG (had a better year in season and playoffs)
Ray Allen
Posey
Powe
Brown
Davis
Coach T

to get the one ring.

Last year the Captain PP fell apart down the stretch of the last two games v the Heat. Poor shot selection, poor timing on fouls, ill advised and poor passes, and got his pocket picked. Generally punked.

McAdoo, Hayes, Unseld, Thurmond, Kemp, and Pierce are all guys I cannot see being voted here.

you keep pointing out the bad games Pierce had like every player on this list hasn't struggled before, you even downplayed his finals mvp performance

bagwell368
10-08-2011, 03:18 PM
you keep pointing out the bad games Pierce had like every player on this list hasn't struggled before, you even downplayed his finals mvp performance

It wasn't one bad game, it was two in a row.

His Finals MVP was deserved, but in the prior series's leading up to it, KG played much better, and PP was off/on. So in his biggest year, he wasn't "the" guy as you stated in the #43 thread. He wasn't better then KG in season either, and he needed a whole influx of great and near great players and a coach to squeek out a ring which he wasn't the primary architect of, just one of a group.

Before that he was an aimless, play little D volume scorer for a franchise that didn't matter. The one year he got the ECF, he was brutal.

So he gets a gold ribbon for one Series, and then?

You tell me how I am supposed to take a poster in a historical thread that doesn't know the NBA before what? 2004? 1999? 1995? Many of these sorts of guys take a look at a stat sheet for 23 seconds and if they are really inspired watch a game or two on the NBA channel. I don't frankly know what you know, but could you provide some insight on the names in play here and compare and contrast them? A post that consists of one world "Pierce" doesn't really do that, you know? Thank you.

Hellcrooner
10-08-2011, 03:26 PM
homer pick to pau again.

but being sincere i woudl only vote over him if i let my bias appart , thurmond, cowens, worthy, schayes.

KnicksorBust
10-08-2011, 07:06 PM
Gasol's peak is arguably better. Parish lacks the peak, but buries McAdoo in longevity and years as a great/very good player by a factor of over 2x.

Clearly you are a McAdoo fan. I saw the man play, in his prime and in his long decline. A fine player, perhaps worthy of #50-52, but there are simply better choices here.

Using some rough estimation:

McAdoo's 3 Year Peak - 32 ppg / 14 rpg / 2.5 bpg / 1.2 spg / 57 TS% / 10.5 OWS / 4.7 DWS

Gasol's 3 Year Peak - 18.5 ppg / 10.5rpg / 1.4 bpg / 0.6 spg / 60 TS% / 9 OWS / 4.4 DWS

Hangtime
10-08-2011, 08:59 PM
I would have to say Sam Jones. Why is he being overlooked here?

Hellcrooner
10-08-2011, 09:30 PM
Using some rough estimation:

McAdoo's 3 Year Peak - 32 ppg / 14 rpg / 2.5 bpg / 1.2 spg / 57 TS% / 10.5 OWS / 4.7 DWS

Gasol's 3 Year Peak - 18.5 ppg / 10.5rpg / 1.4 bpg / 0.6 spg / 60 TS% / 9 OWS / 4.4 DWS

care to adjust to the different pace ?

then rank the efficiency.?


Now compare the regularity during the whole career.

JordansBulls
10-08-2011, 09:52 PM
You added Tim and Penny Hardaway and Grant Hill and when we asked you to take them off or at least take our nominations into consideration you refused.

Those guys have been on since player 37.

Swashcuff
10-08-2011, 10:07 PM
Those guys have been on since player 37.

And since then we've been asking you to either take them off or allow us to nominate. How is it okay for you to add players that you like and we aren't allowed to nominate?

bagwell368
10-08-2011, 11:44 PM
I would have to say Sam Jones. Why is he being overlooked here?

Maybe because an old guy like me just saw him for a few years before he retired. And > 95% never saw him play, and quite a few never saw him on tape, and if they didn't maybe they forgot he came from an earlier time?

Hustlenomics
10-09-2011, 01:03 AM
still haven't seen a legitimate reason against Pierce

Chronz
10-09-2011, 01:43 AM
still haven't seen a legitimate reason against Pierce

Have you ever expressed a legitimate reason against anyone?

kozelkid
10-09-2011, 02:51 AM
Have you ever expressed a legitimate reason against anyone?

Nope.


still haven't seen a legitimate reason against Pierce

Did you NOT read Bagwell's post? Then again, you just ignore any good points that oppose your POV and continue to repeat the same thing like some parrot.

KnicksorBust
10-09-2011, 10:13 AM
care to adjust to the different pace ?

then rank the efficiency.?


Now compare the regularity during the whole career.


What's the point? McAdoo has a significantly superior PPP, was a better rebounder for his generation, and could play 40mpg and carry an offense. Pau's slightly more effecient but that's because he's a number 2 option and gets less attention from the defense. For McAdoo to average over 30ppg with a 57 TS% during his peak is outstanding. That's Wilt/Jordan level scoring effeciency.

bagwell368
10-09-2011, 10:24 AM
What's the point? McAdoo has a significantly superior PPP, was a better rebounder for his generation, and could play 40mpg and carry an offense.

For 3-5 years. And when he was dominant, the NBA was historically weak.

bagwell368
10-09-2011, 10:24 AM
Did you NOT read Bagwell's post? Then again, you just ignore any good points that oppose your POV and continue to repeat the same thing like some parrot.

Thanks, you saved me about 7 minutes or so...

How about a contrast/compare argument?

How about something besides "Finals MVP"?

KnicksorBust
10-09-2011, 10:54 AM
For 3-5 years. And when he was dominant, the NBA was historically weak.

Then explain to me how Bill Walton is up there.

mightybosstone
10-09-2011, 11:32 AM
It should have been Cowens a couple of players ago, and it saddens me that he's getting so little love here. What I don't understand is why he's getting fewer votes now than he got a couple of ranks ago... :shrug:

Chronz
10-09-2011, 11:59 AM
Got mixed feelings about Bobby Mac, seems like everything great about him comes with an asterisk attached. For a 3-Year stretch you could make a small argument for him being the best player in the NBA not named Kareem, of course it came during an era when the league was at its absolute weakest. I dont know if its coincidental or not but the fact that his production dwindled post merger doesnt help him. Even his MVP comes with a giant sign that read, "We hate Rick Barry". He was respected by a hard to win over coach in Dr. Jack, while at the same time his game was so disrespected by Red that he almost quit when the Celtics traded for him. Ironically they traded him to the team Red was thinking about joining.

I honestly dont know how well regarded he was as a defender, I havent seen anything negative/positive pop-up so I always assume that means the player was mediocre. Theres only like 2 or 3 of his games on YT so I cant really go back into the archives on this one, but its important to note that Cowens TORE UP his frontline in G.1 to the tune of 20PTS in the 4th Q to complete the comeback and spoil an upset in the 74 opener. He had epic battles vs the Big E and is one of only like 20 players to ever drop 50 in a playoff game. He pushed eventual champs to 6-7 so theres that.

Still the fact that I just named 2 guys who took him down and they havent even been chosen tells me its much too early for the Mac, even if he is the greatest Brave/Clipper of all time.

Chronz
10-09-2011, 12:07 PM
Thanks, you saved me about 7 minutes or so...

How about a contrast/compare argument?

How about something besides "Finals MVP"?

Hes the guy who kept copying and pasting the same mundane stats in every thread until AI was chosen, thats his idea of an argument. Him and PD were very reluctant to actually compare anyone.

Chronz
10-09-2011, 12:11 PM
It should have been Cowens a couple of players ago, and it saddens me that he's getting so little love here. What I don't understand is why he's getting fewer votes now than he got a couple of ranks ago... :shrug:

You interested in doing a group project? Im trying to assimilate the best posters for this one. Im asking the posters I know are quality type and asking them for a few more. If your interested get at me.

ChiSox219
10-09-2011, 12:24 PM
Reggie Miller?

bagwell368
10-09-2011, 12:29 PM
I dont know if its coincidental or not but the fact that his production dwindled post merger doesnt help him.

Both injuries and post merger IMO, and young tougher bigs coming into the league.


Even his MVP comes with a giant sign that read, "We hate Rick Barry".

How true.


at the same time his game was so disrespected by Red that he almost quit when the Celtics traded for him. Ironically they traded him to the team Red was thinking about joining.

He was traded for nearly nothing in 2/1976 to the Knicks.

The owner and his wife engineered the deal that brought McAdoo, probably the worst in Celtic history - which made Red think about leaving (and led the the famous story of the cab driver that talked him out of it). However, Red saved the day when he dealt him in part for the pick (to Pistons) six months later - that then became Joe Barry Carrol (and got Parish and McHale for it).


I honestly dont know how well regarded he was as a defender, I havent seen anything negative/positive pop-up so I always assume that means the player was mediocre. Theres only like 2 or 3 of his games on YT so I cant really go back into the archives on this one, but its important to note that Cowens TORE UP his frontline in G.1 to the tune of 20PTS in the 4th Q to complete the comeback and spoil an upset in the 74 opener. He had epic battles vs the Big E and is one of only like 20 players to ever drop 50 in a playoff game. He pushed eventual champs to 6-7 so theres that.

Here is the deal on defense:

McAdoo was a long armed defender, good at snagging boards, blocking shots, and stealing passes. Somewhat in the same style mode as Alvin Adams, LaRue Martin, and Joe Barry Carrol. Strong guys like Cowens and Moses style players could go right into him and push him aside like so much confetti - because he was physically weak and not as mentally driven as they were.

He came to final prominence as a rotation big for some great Laker teams that were on TV a lot. Since his offense was well behind him and all he could do anymore is play D (like above), he did, and the announcers were all too happy to tell the fairy tale of how the once great shooter had become an ace defender (still good rebound and block numbers), when in fact he couldn't be deployed well against any tough guys at 4/5 which were coming into more prominence in the NBA his last 4-5 years.

A sort of player that impressed casual fans, or young fans that didn't think to much about it. I never saw him as anything but a very dangerous offensive player that ate up too much clock in his prime, and a serviceable 9th/10th man on a really good team. I hated the deal that brought him to the Celts part of the darkest period in Celts history (Rowe, Wicks too).

KnicksorBust
10-09-2011, 01:23 PM
It should have been Cowens a couple of players ago, and it saddens me that he's getting so little love here. What I don't understand is why he's getting fewer votes now than he got a couple of ranks ago... :shrug:

I voted Cowens after Willis Reed but he's not getting any votes so I'm doing the "vote for the lesser of two evils" BS picks now. I went Sam Jones here. I really want Jones-McAdoo-Cowens to go before the Top 50 is complete.

ShakeN'Bake
10-09-2011, 01:51 PM
And since then we've been asking you to either take them off or allow us to nominate. How is it okay for you to add players that you like and we aren't allowed to nominate?

Don't you know that only players deemed good enough by jb can make the list.

I brought this up as soon as he added them and he never gave any reason nor will he as you have seen from his posts to you here. There is no reason for those people to be on the list when they went seriously nominated.

But oh well it's not like the list is very accurate anyways.

ShakeN'Bake
10-09-2011, 01:54 PM
Those guys have been on since player 37.

Yes and you stopped player nominations at 33. Go check your own thread.

KnicksorBust
10-09-2011, 02:09 PM
^ Who cares?

Chronz
10-09-2011, 03:14 PM
Here is the deal on defense:

McAdoo was a long armed defender, good at snagging boards, blocking shots, and stealing passes. Somewhat in the same style mode as Alvin Adams, LaRue Martin, and Joe Barry Carrol. Strong guys like Cowens and Moses style players could go right into him and push him aside like so much confetti - because he was physically weak and not as mentally driven as they were.

He came to final prominence as a rotation big for some great Laker teams that were on TV a lot. Since his offense was well behind him and all he could do anymore is play D (like above), he did, and the announcers were all too happy to tell the fairy tale of how the once great shooter had become an ace defender (still good rebound and block numbers), when in fact he couldn't be deployed well against any tough guys at 4/5 which were coming into more prominence in the NBA his last 4-5 years.
Yea I had read he was long and his weight #'s arent of your typical bruiser. I kind of figured he fit the bill as an active helper but weak 1 on 1. I think I remember reading something about McHale eating his lunch so bad that the Lakers were beyond ecstatic to finally land a post stopper like Thompson. They could have been talking about Rambis, or Green tho.


A sort of player that impressed casual fans, or young fans that didn't think to much about it. I never saw him as anything but a very dangerous offensive player that ate up too much clock in his prime, and a serviceable 9th/10th man on a really good team. I hated the deal that brought him to the Celts part of the darkest period in Celts history (Rowe, Wicks too).

You must be talking about an old Mac

PinnacleFlash
10-09-2011, 03:45 PM
It is a joke that Miller was voted for 43 and Ray Allen is not even in the discussion.

bagwell368
10-09-2011, 05:13 PM
Yea I had read he was long and his weight #'s arent of your typical bruiser. I kind of figured he fit the bill as an active helper but weak 1 on 1. I think I remember reading something about McHale eating his lunch so bad that the Lakers were beyond ecstatic to finally land a post stopper like Thompson. They could have been talking about Rambis, or Green tho.

McHale was one of the hardest guys to cope with in the NBA in his prime. He killed the Pistons every time he walked into the dressing room before games.

He was active, and athletic. But he couldn't carry his own water against tough body up guys.


You must be talking about an old Mac

Yes, those Laker years is what i had in mind. Good sub on a great team.

Ill21
10-09-2011, 05:30 PM
T-Mac

Chronz
10-09-2011, 06:49 PM
Yes, those Laker years is what i had in mind. Good sub on a great team.
You think this of a PRIME Mac?

PinnacleFlash
10-09-2011, 06:55 PM
lol @ tmac over Pierce, what a joke.

Gimmie the guy who won the finals MVP and got past the 1st round, thanks.

naps
10-09-2011, 07:19 PM
damn, people really sleep on Bob McAdoo. I bet most people don't even know much about his career.

Hangtime
10-09-2011, 07:24 PM
I didn't see McAdoo in his prime but that was one hell of a three year run he had regardless after seeing those numbers.

naps
10-09-2011, 07:39 PM
I didn't see McAdoo in his prime but that was one hell of a three year run he had regardless after seeing those numbers.

Not sure if anyone on this list had such dominance over a three year span. And his career avg are pretty healthy over a 14 year span. Guy's a consecutive three time scoring champions with three of the most dominant years of all time and has a league MVP, and two championships later in his career. Most players have more votes than who doesn't even have any of Bob's accomplishments.

Hustlenomics
10-09-2011, 08:26 PM
Have you ever expressed a legitimate reason against anyone?

I know you aren't talking


Nope.



Did you NOT read Bagwell's post? Then again, you just ignore any good points that oppose your POV and continue to repeat the same thing like some parrot.

yes i did

Hangtime
10-09-2011, 08:28 PM
Not sure if anyone on this list had such dominance over a three year span. And his career avg are pretty healthy over a 14 year span. Guy's a consecutive three time scoring champions with three of the most dominant years of all time and has a league MVP, and two championships later in his career. Most players have more votes than who doesn't even have any of Bob's accomplishments.

McAdoo didn't even make the 50 greatest players list in 1996. He was the only league MVP not to make that respective list.

KnicksorBust
10-09-2011, 08:42 PM
McAdoo didn't even make the 50 greatest players list in 1996. He was the only league MVP not to make that respective list.

Dr. Jack thinks that's a joke:

http://www.slamonline.com/online/nba/2010/11/original-old-school-doo-the-right-thing/

Great read if you got 5-10 minutes.

bagwell368
10-09-2011, 08:47 PM
You think this of a PRIME Mac?

Nope

#35: "For 3-5 years. And when he was dominant, the NBA was historically weak. "

#43: "He came to final prominence as a rotation big for some great Laker teams that were on TV a lot. Since his offense was well behind him and all he could do anymore is play D (like above), he did, and the announcers were all too happy to tell the fairy tale of how the once great shooter had become an ace defender (still good rebound and block numbers), when in fact he couldn't be deployed well against any tough guys at 4/5 which were coming into more prominence in the NBA his last 4-5 years.

#50: "Yes, those Laker years is what i had in mind. Good sub on a great team. "

His prime was in Buffalo starting in year 2 of his career, and going for 3-5 years depending on how define elite.

His next notable home in terms of TV cameras was in LAL when he was a bench guy. I'm just confused with all I wrote that it would seem I was calling the second half of his career as great.

I'll have to add more summary/clarification I guess,

bagwell368
10-09-2011, 08:59 PM
I didn't see McAdoo in his prime but that was one hell of a three year run he had regardless after seeing those numbers.

The Braves played the Celts a lot in the early years (same division), he played for the Celts and later for the Lakers. I saw the guy play at least 150 games during all phases of his career. He is well overrated:

#1. NBA was weak when he was great
#2. He didn't sustain his peak - at all - he was also the only real option on his team several years.
#3. He was a finesse player and could be bodied into submission, and was with regularity by tough guys like Cowens, McHale, etc.
#4. He collected stats like rebounds, blocks, and steals because he had quick feet for a big guy, and did play defense, including weak side ball hawk/rotation when he was in the mood - but down the stretch, he was soft - mentally and weak physically, and was bullied into - yes submission. If he played against guys of the same body type and strength, he would have scored 25k+ points, but he didn't and he didn't.

It's simply too early for the guy to appear.

Hangtime
10-09-2011, 09:00 PM
Dr. Jack thinks that's a joke:

http://www.slamonline.com/online/nba/2010/11/original-old-school-doo-the-right-thing/

Great read if you got 5-10 minutes.

Yeah, I've read that article before. Maybe if it wasn't for the decision to put a young Shaq who was only 4 years in at the time, Mac would have made it.

Hangtime
10-09-2011, 09:02 PM
The Braves played the Celts a lot in the early years (same division), he played for the Celts and later for the Lakers. I saw the guy play at least 150 games during all phases of his career. He is well overrated:

#1. NBA was weak when he was great
#2. He didn't sustain his peak - at all - he was also the only real option on his team several years.
#3. He was a finesse player and could be bodied into submission, and was with regularity by tough guys like Cowens, McHale, etc.
#4. He collected stats like rebounds, blocks, and steals because he had quick feet for a big guy, and did play defense, including weak side ball hawk/rotation when he was in the mood - but down the stretch, he was soft - mentally and weak physically, and was bullied into - yes submission. If he played against guys of the same body type and strength, he would have scored 25k+ points, but he didn't and he didn't.

It's simply too early for the guy to appear.
Would you have put him on the original 50 greatest player list in 96? Do you think he was at least deserving of that honor then.

Hellcrooner
10-09-2011, 10:23 PM
Would you have put him on the original 50 greatest player list in 96? Do you think he was at least deserving of that honor then.

then?

maybe, not 100% sure, there were other omissions like Gilmore , with a case.

Hellcrooner
10-09-2011, 10:25 PM
btw people shoudl consider that mcadoo "greatness" happened when.....
Dr J, Gilmore, Mcginnis, Issell, Gervin, Moses and some others were Playing THE ABA.

Funny enough once the Merger came, he slowly started to dissapear.

bagwell368
10-09-2011, 11:50 PM
Would you have put him on the original 50 greatest player list in 96? Do you think he was at least deserving of that honor then.

Borderline out I think.

Chronz
10-09-2011, 11:56 PM
lol @ tmac over Pierce, what a joke.

Gimmie the guy who won the finals MVP and got past the 1st round, thanks.

Your not taking his teammates with you when you choose him

Chronz
10-10-2011, 12:06 AM
I know you aren't talking

LOL whats that suppose to me, all I do is compare and contrast players on this *****. In fact there even a post where Im practically begging you AI supporters to make an actual argument.

Chronz
10-10-2011, 12:07 AM
Not sure if anyone on this list had such dominance over a three year span. And his career avg are pretty healthy over a 14 year span. Guy's a consecutive three time scoring champions with three of the most dominant years of all time and has a league MVP, and two championships later in his career. Most players have more votes than who doesn't even have any of Bob's accomplishments.
I disagree, you dont get to tally up rings and stats like that. He won rings as a super sub and put up stats in a depleted NBA.

Chronz
10-10-2011, 12:11 AM
damn, people really sleep on Bob McAdoo. I bet most people don't even know much about his career.

You do realize this isnt a blind poll, you can look at the posts made in this thread and see the arguments against him. Try tackling one of those instead of making these assumptions.

Chronz
10-10-2011, 12:15 AM
Nope
I'm just confused with all I wrote that it would seem I was calling the second half of his career as great.

I'll have to add more summary/clarification I guess,
Sorry for being slow but I needed the clarification because when you said this;

I never saw him as anything but a very dangerous offensive player that ate up too much clock in his prime, and a serviceable 9th/10th man on a really good team.

I took it as a broad generalization of his career but of course you meant the latter part of his career.

PinnacleFlash
10-10-2011, 12:40 AM
Your not taking his teammates with you when you choose him

Yeah I know, Pierce is still better than Tmac. Give me the winner not the loser. Then again you hopped on the Rockets wagon because of Mac right?

Knicks21
10-10-2011, 05:10 AM
Shawn was such a beast ... The guy nearly averaged a triple double for his career, 15 points, 9 rebounds, 9 children, 2 assists

ShakeN'Bake
10-10-2011, 08:39 AM
Shawn was such a beast ... The guy nearly averaged a triple double for his career, 15 points, 9 rebounds, 9 children, 2 assists

Damn nine kids a game...That impressive. Wilt has lost his title of slaying chicks.

mightybosstone
10-10-2011, 09:06 AM
I voted Cowens after Willis Reed but he's not getting any votes so I'm doing the "vote for the lesser of two evils" BS picks now. I went Sam Jones here. I really want Jones-McAdoo-Cowens to go before the Top 50 is complete.

Agreed. Which is why I'm so shocked to see guys like Webber, Mourning and Hill getting more votes than him. I'm convinced it's just because nobody knows who Cowens is, or that they're just incredibly stupid...

Hellcrooner
10-10-2011, 11:38 AM
Agreed. Which is why I'm so shocked to see guys like Webber, Mourning and Hill getting more votes than him. I'm convinced it's just because nobody knows who Cowens is, or that they're just incredibly stupid...

Pierce shouldnt get more votes than cowens.
But well the votation has become a complete joke right now, with ringless dudes with careers cut in a half by alcohol/drugs/Injury or whatever getting votes.

bagwell368
10-10-2011, 12:23 PM
Pierce shouldnt get more votes than cowens.
But well the votation has become a complete joke right now, with ringless dudes with careers cut in a half by alcohol/drugs/Injury or whatever getting votes.

When looking at a guy from an historic franchise, it's interesting to look at other guys too.

Russell, Bird top shelf, which is obvious.
Havlick
Cousy, McHale, next tier

The next group to think about includes:

Sam Jones
Sharman
PP
Parish
Cowens

If you like PP for a long career, then you HAVE to like Parish more, his broad peak is longer then PP's, his best 5 year peak about as much impact as PP, his career much longer, and his ring count 3 > 1 (sorry don't count his 2 game season in '97 w/ the Bulls)

If you like key players that won TEN titles (and was a big part of 9, and a key part of 8), then Sam Jones is the guy.

Sharman had a better peak then PP, but a shorter career - what do you value more?

Cowens was a scrappy guy that along with Havlicek anchored a 2 title team.

In PP's long career until the HUGE influx of talent that came for '07-'08, what had he done? A throw himself into the defensive players to draw fouls (nice skill), not play very strenuous defense, play like garbage in the ECF against the Nets. A volume scorer, with pretty high TOV rates, good D rebounder for a 3, good ball hawk. Never been seen as a top 5 player in this league, never in the top 10 for any rate stats.

He's made over $137M from the Celts for one title, and if you replace Bird AND Havlicek with PP at the same ages, that's 5 titles that just got spunged off the record books.

My rank of these guys:

Parish
Jones
Cowens - real nice MVP results
PP - may end up above Cowens at the end of his career
Sharman

mightybosstone
10-10-2011, 12:46 PM
^ My problem with Parish is that he was the No. 3 guy on very good championship teams (same thing with Worthy). I personally don't think that anybody should crack the top 50 for being a No. 3 guy. Also, despite a longer career, Parish only cracked an All-NBA team twice and never made an All-defensive team, while Cowens put up three apiece and was the best or second best player on two championship teams. Cowens was more important to those two rings as Parish was to those three. Take away Parish and those Celtics teams still had Bird, McHale, DJ, Ainge, etc. Take away Cowens and they've got an aging Hondo and Jo Jo White.

I'd go:
1. Cowens
2. Jones
3. Parish
4. Pierce

Although, I think you can make a case that all four deserve to crack the top 50. To think of Reggie Miller taking a spot away from one of these four absolutely disgusts me...

KnicksorBust
10-10-2011, 03:11 PM
^ My problem with Parish is that he was the No. 3 guy on very good championship teams (same thing with Worthy). I personally don't think that anybody should crack the top 50 for being a No. 3 guy. Also, despite a longer career, Parish only cracked an All-NBA team twice and never made an All-defensive team, while Cowens put up three apiece and was the best or second best player on two championship teams. Cowens was more important to those two rings as Parish was to those three. Take away Parish and those Celtics teams still had Bird, McHale, DJ, Ainge, etc. Take away Cowens and they've got an aging Hondo and Jo Jo White.

I'd go:
1. Cowens
2. Jones
3. Parish
4. Pierce

Although, I think you can make a case that all four deserve to crack the top 50. To think of Reggie Miller taking a spot away from one of these four absolutely disgusts me...

This is such a clean post and I love that statement in bold because it strikes a huge chord with me. Worthy walked into a dream. He really did. Simmons talk about it in his Book of Basketball how Tom Chambers gave his teams the same production as Worthy (stats extremely similar) but because only one of them had Magic/Kareem as teammates, only one of them is a top 50 player. Do any of us really believe if Worthy had gone to Clippers, he would still be regarded as a top 50 player? It gets swept under the rug but it's the truth.

Hellcrooner
10-10-2011, 03:22 PM
This is such a clean post and I love that statement in bold because it strikes a huge chord with me. Worthy walked into a dream. He really did. Simmons talk about it in his Book of Basketball how Tom Chambers gave his teams the same production as Worthy (stats extremely similar) but because only one of them had Magic/Kareem as teammates, only one of them is a top 50 player. Do any of us really believe if Worthy had gone to Clippers, he would still be regarded as a top 50 player? It gets swept under the rug but it's the truth.

Ill tell you something.
Worhty was basically the FIRST scoring option in showtimes last title.

Then let me remind you something more.

The young worhty was the STAR and FRANCHISE dude of Norht Carolina, in a team that had amazing talent including that dude with the shaven head ( tough he didnt shave back then) that appears in a ton of merchandising since the last 25 years.
You know? Worhty was the FRANCHISE dude in that team OVER that dude.

If he had gone somwhere else like Utah for example he could have probably led them to a ring himself ( with the proper help of course).

PatsSoxKnicks
10-10-2011, 05:18 PM
You interested in doing a group project? Im trying to assimilate the best posters for this one. Im asking the posters I know are quality type and asking them for a few more. If your interested get at me.

Just curious but whats the group project?

KnicksorBust
10-10-2011, 05:52 PM
Ill tell you something.
Worhty was basically the FIRST scoring option in showtimes last title.

Then let me remind you something more.

The young worhty was the STAR and FRANCHISE dude of Norht Carolina, in a team that had amazing talent including that dude with the shaven head ( tough he didnt shave back then) that appears in a ton of merchandising since the last 25 years.
You know? Worhty was the FRANCHISE dude in that team OVER that dude.

If he had gone somwhere else like Utah for example he could have probably led them to a ring himself ( with the proper help of course).

Do you really believe that? Him and Dantley? I don't see it at all.

Hellcrooner
10-10-2011, 10:42 PM
Do you really believe that? Him and Dantley? I don't see it at all.

and griffith, eaton, thurl bailey and maybe even stockton would have still sleeped to them since he didnt had any reputation before the draft.

Chronz
10-10-2011, 10:53 PM
Ill tell you something.
Worhty was basically the FIRST scoring option in showtimes last title.
So, he was far from their best player. Lots of players have been the leading scorers of title teams without being legitimate stars.


Then let me remind you something more.
The young worhty was the STAR and FRANCHISE dude of Norht Carolina, in a team that had amazing talent including that dude with the shaven head ( tough he didnt shave back then) that appears in a ton of merchandising since the last 25 years.
You know? Worhty was the FRANCHISE dude in that team OVER that dude.

Who cares, this isnt a collegiate based nomination.


If he had gone somwhere else like Utah for example he could have probably led them to a ring himself ( with the proper help of course).

BS, dude wasnt that good. Hes lucky to have Magic inflate his efficiency and even with his help he wasnt that impressive.

AntiG
10-10-2011, 11:40 PM
you gotta be kidding yourselves if you are voting Worthy over Pierce... :facepalm:

bagwell368
10-10-2011, 11:53 PM
^ My problem with Parish is that he was the No. 3 guy on very good championship teams (same thing with Worthy). I personally don't think that anybody should crack the top 50 for being a No. 3 guy. Also, despite a longer career, Parish only cracked an All-NBA team twice and never made an All-defensive team, while Cowens put up three apiece and was the best or second best player on two championship teams. Cowens was more important to those two rings as Parish was to those three. Take away Parish and those Celtics teams still had Bird, McHale, DJ, Ainge, etc. Take away Cowens and they've got an aging Hondo and Jo Jo White.

I'd go:
1. Cowens
2. Jones
3. Parish
4. Pierce

Although, I think you can make a case that all four deserve to crack the top 50. To think of Reggie Miller taking a spot away from one of these four absolutely disgusts me...

If you were right about Parish, you'd be right, but I think you are going with the popular belief here:

1978-1979 - 1st or 2nd best guy on GSW (John Lucas), I think he was #1
1980-1981 - easily argue that he's either #1 or #2 on that ring team
1981-1982 - the #2, with Maxwell a near #3
1982-1983 - clearly #2 after Bird, McHale well back in #3
1983-1984 - dead heat with McHale for #2 regular season - another ring
1988-1989 - tied at #1 w/ McHale
1990-1991 - clearly the #1 on the team

Outside of these years, Parish had 7 other years when he was the 3rd, 4th or 5th guy; and six other years when he was a useful player.

bagwell368
10-11-2011, 08:06 AM
you gotta be kidding yourselves if you are voting Worthy over Pierce... :facepalm:

And you've got to be kidding yourself if you think Pierce is the proper guy to vote into this slot over the crew that he's up against.

I like PP a lot, I just do not believe most Celt fans here happen to be able to put him into historical perspective properly. It's more the mob that demands a guy from their team that they've actually seen and come to like gets his. Well its NOT time for "his". Sam Jones, Robert Parish just from the Celts have PP lapped. Other guys like Gilmore are far more deserving. PP should pop up between #48 and #54 IMO.

mightybosstone
10-11-2011, 11:41 AM
If you were right about Parish, you'd be right, but I think you are going with the popular belief here:

1978-1979 - 1st or 2nd best guy on GSW (John Lucas), I think he was #1
1980-1981 - easily argue that he's either #1 or #2 on that ring team
1981-1982 - the #2, with Maxwell a near #3
1982-1983 - clearly #2 after Bird, McHale well back in #3
1983-1984 - dead heat with McHale for #2 regular season - another ring
1988-1989 - tied at #1 w/ McHale
1990-1991 - clearly the #1 on the team

Outside of these years, Parish had 7 other years when he was the 3rd, 4th or 5th guy; and six other years when he was a useful player.

In that first title, based on the numbers (granted, I was not around for that time, so that is all I have to base this off of), Maxwell appears to be just as big of a contributor as Parish and posted better postseason numbers, so you could argue there's a tie for No. 2, but I certainly wouldn't put him above Bird, who posted a ridiculous 22, 14 and 6 in the postseason. And once McHale picked up his game, he was consistently the No. 2 over Parish.

And did you ACTUALLY look at the numbers on those late 80s and early 90s teams? Sure, he posted a higher PER and WS/48 than most of those guys, but in 90-91, he was fifth in FGA per game. Fifth! How can you say he's a No. 1 when he was the fifth most likely guy to take a shot?

bagwell368
10-11-2011, 01:31 PM
In that first title, based on the numbers (granted, I was not around for that time, so that is all I have to base this off of), Maxwell appears to be just as big of a contributor as Parish and posted better postseason numbers, so you could argue there's a tie for No. 2, but I certainly wouldn't put him above Bird, who posted a ridiculous 22, 14 and 6 in the postseason. And once McHale picked up his game, he was consistently the No. 2 over Parish.

Oops, 1981 was supposed to be tie for 2 w/ Maxwell.

Not so much on McHale, after 1980-1981 - Parish was #2 each year with Maxwell lurking - until 1983-1984 when McHale pushed Maxwell out of the way.

Tie McHale in '88-'89

And still had gas in the tank to be #1 in 1990-1991 when McHale and Bird were falling apart, and note that Parish was older then either of those guys.


And did you ACTUALLY look at the numbers on those late 80s and early 90s teams? Sure, he posted a higher PER and WS/48 than most of those guys, but in 90-91, he was fifth in FGA per game. Fifth! How can you say he's a No. 1 when he was the fifth most likely guy to take a shot?

WS/48 - higher then most in 1990-1991? How about #1?

5th in FTA, OK, and #1 in FG%

Lewis FGA: 1219
Bird FGA: 1017
Shaw FGA: 942
Gamble FGA: 933
Parish FGA: 811

Did you look at the stats? Parish was 132 shots out of 3rd place, less then 2 a game.

How about FGM?

Lewis: 598
Gamble: 548
McHale: 504
Parish: 485 (20 out of 3rd place - .33 a game)

How about FG%, or eFG%, or TS% - Parish all number 1. ORTg #2, DRtg #1

OWS and DWS - #1 in both. A .198 WS/48 with .182 for McHale (in 474 less minutes played then Parish). Bird, Lewis, Gamble all lagged a good deal behind Parish.

BTW, Parish was also #2 in FTA/FTM behind only Lewis.

Yes, 1990-1991 - Parish easily #1 Celt at age 37. Bird retired after his age 35 season, so did McHale, Maxwell was done after his age 32 season, Cowens toast at 31, with a cup of coffee for the Bucks at 34. Sam Jones done after his 35 season. Parish made it through his age 43 season.....

Parish does not have the peak of Bird, McHale, KG, Duncan, Russell, and a few dozen other bigs. Parish played the most games in NBA history. Only Kareem, K. Malone, and Moses are in the same ballpark. It counts.

mightybosstone
10-11-2011, 01:46 PM
WS/48 - higher then most in 1990-1991? How about #1?

5th in FTA, OK, and #1 in FG%

Lewis FGA: 1219
Bird FGA: 1017
Shaw FGA: 942
Gamble FGA: 933
Parish FGA: 811

Did you look at the stats? Parish was 132 shots out of 3rd place, less then 2 a game.

How about FGM?

Lewis: 598
Gamble: 548
McHale: 504
Parish: 485 (20 out of 3rd place - .33 a game)

How about FG%, or eFG%, or TS% - Parish all number 1. ORTg #2, DRtg #1

OWS and DWS - #1 in both. A .198 WS/48 with .182 for McHale (in 474 less minutes played then Parish). Bird, Lewis, Gamble all lagged a good deal behind Parish.

BTW, Parish was also #2 in FTA/FTM behind only Lewis.

Yes, 1990-1991 - Parish easily #1 Celt.
Maybe you and I have different views on what "No. 1" means, but I look at No. 1 and think "top scoring option" not "top WS/48 or PER guy." A good defensive big who puts up good rebounding numbers and is efficient will put up better advanced stats. So what? Does that make him a No. 1? No. Bird and Lewis were easily the No. 1 and No. 2 guys on that team, while Parish and McHale were close behind as the third and fourth guys.

Hell, if your argument is based solely off of WS, then Nene was the No. 1 on the Nuggets before Melo was traded last season.

Another good indicator for me is usage rate. McHale, Bird and Lewis all posted significantly higher usage rates that season. And at the end of the day, the most efficient guy is not necessarily your best player. Nene certainly wasn't. And I would hope that you wouldn't consider Tyson Chandler as the No. 1 Dallas option over Dirk Nowitzki last season...

mightybosstone
10-11-2011, 01:49 PM
Yes, 1990-1991 - Parish easily #1 Celt at age 37. Bird retired after his age 35 season, so did McHale, Maxwell was done after his age 32 season, Cowens toast at 31, with a cup of coffee for the Bucks at 34. Sam Jones done after his 35 season. Parish made it through his age 43 season.....

Parish does not have the peak of Bird, McHale, KG, Duncan, Russell, and a few dozen other bigs. Parish played the most games in NBA history. Only Kareem, K. Malone, and Moses are in the same ballpark. It counts.

Peak vs. Longevity is what you're debating, but I'll take Cowens peak over Parish's longevity. And I'd certainly take McHale and Bird's peaks over him. Playing for a long time does not give make you an unbelievable player, what you do during that time does. It's why Bill Walton was a better player than someone like Kevin Willis.

bagwell368
10-11-2011, 02:06 PM
Peak vs. Longevity is what you're debating, but I'll take Cowens peak over Parish's longevity. And I'd certainly take McHale and Bird's peaks over him. Playing for a long time does not give make you an unbelievable player, what you do during that time does. It's why Bill Walton was a better player than someone like Kevin Willis.

That's your call, I like both. McHale is ahead of Parish for those reasons, but Cowens is not in front of Parish IMO.

Chronz
10-11-2011, 02:20 PM
Maybe you and I have different views on what "No. 1" means, but I look at No. 1 and think "top scoring option" not "top WS/48 or PER guy." A good defensive big who puts up good rebounding numbers and is efficient will put up better advanced stats. So what? Does that make him a No. 1?
In some cases yes, Camby was our best player for awhile on the Clippers and he never looked to shoot.


No. Bird and Lewis were easily the No. 1 and No. 2 guys on that team, while Parish and McHale were close behind as the third and fourth guys.
Lewis was never better than Parish.


Another good indicator for me is usage rate. McHale, Bird and Lewis all posted significantly higher usage rates that season. And at the end of the day, the most efficient guy is not necessarily your best player. Nene certainly wasn't. And I would hope that you wouldn't consider Tyson Chandler as the No. 1 Dallas option over Dirk Nowitzki last season...

Your top scoring option isnt your best player either, or do you consider Beasley to be superior than Kevin Love? Nene has a better case than you think, theres a reason why the Nuggs got better without Melo.

bagwell368
10-11-2011, 02:21 PM
Maybe you and I have different views on what "No. 1" means, but I look at No. 1 and think "top scoring option" not "top WS/48 or PER guy." A good defensive big who puts up good rebounding numbers and is efficient will put up better advanced stats. So what? Does that make him a No. 1? No. Bird and Lewis were easily the No. 1 and No. 2 guys on that team, while Parish and McHale were close behind as the third and fourth guys.

#1 to me means best player, not most go to shooting guy. Shooting is a sub-set of player, not the the other way around.

Lewis was the #1 shooting option - a good shooter from 2 and FT (useless from the 3) alll the way. He didn't rebound much, didn't pass much, with a meh 16.2 PER.

Bird was toast in 1990-1991, he could barely play. Bird's FG% stunk (for him), he missed games, he had to lie on the floor and on planes, and get PT on his back multiple times a day, he himself said he should have retired after 1987-1988 in hindsight.

No way either of those two had more impact then Parish did that year.

In truth McHale and Gamble gave Parish a better run to Parish in 1990-1991 regular season then Lewis or Bird. In the playoffs Bird, Gamble, and Lewis were all well below Parish and McHale. I wrote a pretty long piece about this team 6-12 months ago, I know this team, and I know it from watching them, not just a stat sheet.

Based on your logic here, then you MUST prefer PP over Cowens, how could it be otherwise?


Hell, if your argument is based solely off of WS, then Nene was the No. 1 on the Nuggets before Melo was traded last season.

I quoted a lot more then WS, stats are easy to use. I can also use subjective descriptions too. I respect most of what you write even considering we seldom agree, but I was there. Parish had a very fine year that year - period. Better then the others.

mightybosstone
10-11-2011, 04:27 PM
In some cases yes, Camby was our best player for awhile on the Clippers and he never looked to shoot.
Exactly. And I love Marcus Camby, but I doubt any of us would necessarily call him a "No. 1."


Lewis was never better than Parish.
I dunno that I would call him a better player, but towards the end of Parish's career, Lewis was a better scorer.


Your top scoring option isnt your best player either, or do you consider Beasley to be superior than Kevin Love? Nene has a better case than you think, theres a reason why the Nuggs got better without Melo.
I get your point about Beasley and Love, but Love does average more points. And on the other end of the spectrum, what about Chandler and Dirk?


#1 to me means best player, not most go to shooting guy. Shooting is a sub-set of player, not the the other way around.
It's not just scoring, it's who takes games over when it matters most. The guy who impacts the game most at the most critical moments. The problem is, I don't know that because I was 3 years old that season, so all I have to go off is stats. If you tell me that Parish was the go to guy in the fourth quarter and the best player on the team, I suppose I would have to take your word for it.

But really, we're getting off topic at this point. The debate was that he was the third best player on three championship teams and they won that last title in 86, not 91. And Bird and McHale put up superior numbers that season. And if we're talking about a team of a particular era, McHale is generally considered the No. 2 guy of the 80s Celtics, not Parish, and his statistics back that up.

Bottom line, though, I don't think you can make the argument that Parish was more instrumental to those 80s Celtics teams as Cowens was to the 70s Celtics teams. The 80s Celtics teams were stacked from top to bottom, while the 70s teams were Cowens, an aging Hondo and Jo Jo White.


Based on your logic here, then you MUST prefer PP over Cowens, how could it be otherwise?
Cowens led the 76 Celtics team in scoring and posted a ridiculous 19, 16, 4, 1 and 1 that year and was second behind Havlicek's scoring in 74, but posted nearly identical numbers. No matter how you look at it, he was the No. 1 or No. 2 option on two championship teams, won an MVP and was named to three all-nba and three all-defensive teams.

I love Paul Pierce, but his resume just isn't as impressive. He was a No. 2 on one championship team (Garnett was the offensive No. 1 in the 08 postseason) and made four all-nba teams (three third teams, while Cowens made three second teams), but despite his underrated man defense, he never impacted that side of the court in the same way Cowens did.

bagwell368
10-11-2011, 05:29 PM
It's not just scoring, it's who takes games over when it matters most. The guy who impacts the game most at the most critical moments. The problem is, I don't know that because I was 3 years old that season, so all I have to go off is stats. If you tell me that Parish was the go to guy in the fourth quarter and the best player on the team, I suppose I would have to take your word for it.

Game in and game out, Parish had the regular season, and McHale was next; Lewis 3rd, and sadly Bird outside of his reputation, going to battle w/ Gamble for 4th. Gamble came up like junk in the playoffs however.


But really, we're getting off topic at this point. The debate was that he was the third best player on three championship teams and they won that last title in 86, not 91.

The topic of the thread isn't just the Celts, or the 1980-1986 time frame. Bird owns #1, but Parish outpoints both McHale and Max for 2nd overall during the Bird years, because both Max and McHale were not hugely in evidence throughout that time frame.

Parish also gets GSW credit while Bird (but for one year) and McHale were in school. Then Parish came up fine (albeit he was aging) after 1988 when Bird and McHale went down the tubes.


And Bird and McHale put up superior numbers that season.

Bird in 1990-1991? That's an incredible claim, one not backed up by anything but numbers on a page (maybe), and do take a look at how many games Bird played in the 1988-1992 time frame (6, 75, 60, 45) vs. Parish (80, 79, 81, 79) and tell me Bird was more valuable to the Celts those 4 years. McHale was much more in evidence then Bird was. Do you know baseball SABR stats? Well there is something call "replacement level" and all those minutes were short those 4 years, played by bench guy to make up the shortfall with Parish would put him way way down from Parish. That's why longevity matters.

PR 9962 MP > LB 7072 MP: Bird 29% less minutes then Parish, 723 MP less per season for Bird, or nearly 9 minutes more per game for Parish.


And if we're talking about a team of a particular era, McHale is generally considered the No. 2 guy of the 80s Celtics, not Parish, and his statistics back that up.

As I mentioned in the post you quoted, I know all about common belief. I also know common belief has almost erased Maxwell from the equation for one thing, even though the '81 Championship is unlikely w/o him, and '84 as well perhaps. One reason McHale's numbers are so excellent, is he didn't play a lot of minutes per game. Did you look that up on your stat sheet?

1980-1981: Bird 39.5 > Max 33.7 > Parish 28.0 > McHale 20.1
1981-1982: Bird 38.0 > Max 33.2 > Parish 31.7 > McHale 28.4
1982-1983: Bird 37.7 > Parish 31.5 > McHale 28.6 > Max 28.5
1983-1984: Bird 38.3 > Parish 35.8 > McHale 31.4 > Max 31.3
1984-1985: Bird 39.5 > Parish 36.1 > McHale 33.6 > Max 26.2
1985-1986: Bird 38.0 > McHale 35.3 > Parish 31.7 (Parish played 13 more games then McHale)
1986-1987: Bird 40.6 > McHale 39.7 > Parish 37.4 (Parish played 3 more games then McHale)
1987-1988: Bird 39.0 > McHale 37.3 > Parish 31.2 (Parish played 10 more games then McHale)
1988-1989: McHale 36.9 > Parish 35.5 > Bird 31.5 (Parish played 2 more games then McHale)
1989-1990: Bird 39.3 > McHale 33.2 > Parish 30.3 (! McHale 3 more games)
1990-1991: Bird 38.0 > McHale 30.4 > Parish 30.1 (Parish played 13 more games then McHale)
1991-1992: Bird 36.9 > Parish 28.9 > McHale 25.0
1992-1993: Parish 26.9 > Bird N/A > McHale N/A
1993-1994: Parish 27.2 > Bird N/A > McHale N/A

So, Parish played a lot more then McHale the first five years that they were both on the team, in fact McHale didn't start very much. The Celts won 2 titles in these years.

Then McHale edged in front the next six years (only BTW one of them a title year) - but when we factor in that Parish played more games almost every year, the difference is in fact reversed in terms of minutes played for the Celts in these years.

So if McHale is so bloody great why wasn't he on the floor that much except 1984-1990??


Bottom line, though, I don't think you can make the argument that Parish was more instrumental to those 80s Celtics teams as Cowens was to the 70s Celtics teams. The 80s Celtics teams were stacked from top to bottom, while the 70s teams were Cowens, an aging Hondo and Jo Jo White.

Did you answer my post that went into Cowens turning his back on his team, and basically sucking the last 40% of his career - minus one year)?

Havlicek had an awesome year during the first title w/ Cowens. Please. Forget about Paul Silas, Westphal? Charlie Scott? Chaney? Nelson? You actually propose to lecture me on those teams? Kool, go ahead.


Cowens led the 76 Celtics team in scoring and posted a ridiculous 19, 16, 4, 1 and 1 that year and was second behind Havlicek's scoring in 74, but posted nearly identical numbers. No matter how you look at it, he was the No. 1 or No. 2 option on two championship teams, won an MVP and was named to three all-nba and three all-defensive teams.

I know, I was there. What the hell did Cowens do after the 2nd ring, excuse that why don't you. Read what I wrote, then sort through stats, and WTH, go watch 10 games of his 2nd ring career outside of '77-'78 and then, go ahead and nominate him here. I voted for him but purely as a way to try and block someone else even less deserving.

mightybosstone
10-11-2011, 06:07 PM
Bird in 1990-1991?
No. In 86.


One reason McHale's numbers are so excellent, is he didn't play a lot of minutes per game. Did you look that up on your stat sheet? So, Parish played a lot more then McHale the first five years that they were both on the team, in fact McHale didn't start very much. The Celts won 2 titles in these years.
Playing more minutes does not make you a better player, just like playing for a longer period of time does not make you a better player. Monta Ellis played more minutes than anyone in the league last season and that does not make him the better player.


Did you answer my post that went into Cowens turning his back on his team, and basically sucking the last 40% of his career - minus one year)? Havlicek had an awesome year during the first title w/ Cowens. Please. Forget about Paul Silas, Westphal? Charlie Scott? Chaney? Nelson? You actually propose to lecture me on those teams? Kool, go ahead.
Scott was only part of the second championship. Chaney, Silas and Nelson were role players on those teams. And Westphal was a baby on those teams and never cracked 20 minutes a game. Sorry if I'm not impressed compared to an 86 Celtics team that many people consider to be the greatest of all time with Bird, McHale, Parish, DJ, Ainge and Walton/Wedman off the bench.


I know, I was there. What the hell did Cowens do after the 2nd ring, excuse that why don't you. Read what I wrote, then sort through stats, and WTH, go watch 10 games of his 2nd ring career outside of '77-'78 and then, go ahead and nominate him here. I voted for him but purely as a way to try and block someone else even less deserving.
You're older than I am, but I'm not going to apologize for not being alive for that time. Yes, his numbers took a dip after the 78 season, but he was a physical player who dealt with injuries at the tail end of his career. I won't knock him for having a short career any more than I would knock Willis Reed or Bill Walton, who had shorter careers, but have already been added to this list.

bagwell368
10-11-2011, 07:00 PM
Playing more minutes does not make you a better player, just like playing for a longer period of time does not make you a better player.

But Parish played more then McHale, more then Max, only Bird played more. There isn't a direct correlation, esp with 3 forwards like those, but he still got the minutes. More minutes before McHale's prime, and more after. This is the #45 thread for NBA all timers.

Even if McHale was a better player then Parish re the Celts (I sure voted that way in the Celts board, in fact I led the way for him to get voted ahead of PP, because he is, and it's laughable IMO to put PP ahead of McHale, Sam Jones, or Parish.) what about the rest of Parish's career?


Monta Ellis played more minutes than anyone in the league last season and that does not make him the better player.

Yeah sure, but Monta wasn't getting big minutes on one of the greatest teams ever, was he?


Scott was only part of the second championship.

That's true I forgot the list was just for the first title.


Chaney, Silas and Nelson were role players on those teams. And Westphal was a baby on those teams and never cracked 20 minutes a game.

Silas a role player, that's utter rubbish! No Silas, no titles - either one.


Sorry if I'm not impressed compared to an 86 Celtics team that many people consider to be the greatest of all time with Bird, McHale, Parish, DJ, Ainge and Walton/Wedman off the bench.

What are you arguing now? Of course all 3 Bird teams were better then both Cowens teams, the NBA was in a historical lull during Cowens rings, not so Birds. So that further weakens your case of Cowens > Parish which was already unsupportable IMO. Good job.


You're older than I am, but I'm not going to apologize for not being alive for that time. Yes, his numbers took a dip after the 78 season, but he was a physical player who dealt with injuries at the tail end of his career. I won't knock him for having a short career any more than I would knock Willis Reed or Bill Walton, who had shorter careers, but have already been added to this list.

Bill Walton is sorry to say it this way - the great white hope that couldn't stand up to the NBA. Best passing big man I ever saw. Great all around game, but his actual accomplishments are pint sized, and that placement is shameful. He's getting placed for what might have been. I can tell you that if the 1982 me was brought back in time to the 1952 NBA I would have been an AS, so....?

No need to apologize, hell, I'd like be your age any day. But you have to grant some frustration on my part when people tell me this and that about Russell, or Cowens, or anyone else on the Celts the past 45 years that's based on hearsay or stat sheets.