PDA

View Full Version : Constructing the perfect team without cheat codes



Chronz
05-23-2014, 02:10 PM
Cheat codes = Tier 1/2 GOAT's at their position

The following cannot be named:




PG
Magic
West
Big O
Isiah
Stockton

SG
MJ
Kobe
Wade

SF
Bron
Bird
Julius

PF
Duncan

C
Kareem
Wilt
Shaq
Russell
Hakeem
Moses
Robinson
Walton







I left out some names because I feel like there would be a debate on who you would take as the next best of the bunch, or which set of skills you would prefer to have complimenting the rest of the team.

mdm692
05-23-2014, 02:13 PM
For me

Nash
VC
Grant Hill
Barkley
Ewing

HYFR
05-23-2014, 02:15 PM
Payton
Iverson
Pippen
Dirk
Ewing

Chronz
05-23-2014, 02:21 PM
If those 2 teams were to square off, I honestly dont know who I would favor.

I had a feeling Ewing might have been worthy of being blacklisted but he had his lapses. Still, if hes too popular, maybe we should go without him. Personally, I'd take Reed ahead of him.

abe_froman
05-23-2014, 02:21 PM
fraizer(leader,1b scoring option,clutchness and great defense)
allen(spacing,can score in loads but can work in a team filled with other options)
pippen(some spacing,2ndary playmaker,beast defender,can score but fits with a reduced role)
kg(primary scorer,great defender,intensity)
cowens(garbageman/clean up man,another tough defender,brings heart ,hustle,rebounding,tenacity,ect.)

Chronz
05-23-2014, 02:25 PM
Thats a sexy team. Had Frazier on the list till I remembered the minority (me) making a case for him during the voting.

Ebbs
05-23-2014, 02:29 PM
Gary Payton
Clyde Drexler
Scottie Pippen
Dirk Nowitzki
Alonzo Mourning

good night

ManRam
05-23-2014, 02:32 PM
Trying not to be too boring here...

Paul
West
Scottie
Dirk
Thurmond

Went untraditional at the 5. I doubt (m)any will pick him. I almost went with Ewing, but I prefer Thurmond's toughness and defense a tad more on this roster. I don't need a hyper-skilled center, I just need a guy who will defend his *** off and be a tenacious rebounder. That's Nate. He's grimy as **** too, which I love next to Dirk.

PF was the toughest, unpredictably-so with only one "cheat code". It came down to Dirk and KG for me. No disrespect to Malone or Chuck. I kinda get hinged between what I need more from that spot: defense or shooting. I chose shooting. Dirk's my guy, even though I prefer KG in my all-time rankings. I think the team defense is gonna be solid enough (West, Scottie and Pat are all great defenders) to justify passing up the better defender for a needed shooter. With Nash and Dirk keeping the defenses honest, the offense should open up a ton.

I went with Paul over Nash only when I decided to put Dirk on this team. I would have gone Nash if I went KG. I didn't care much about passing because both are great and they'll be playing alongside two exceptional passers at the 2 and 3. I just think Paul's a slightly better all around player. Defense really is the difference.

Robbw241
05-23-2014, 02:32 PM
Jason Kidd
Ray Allen
Scottie Pippen
KG
Ewing

ATX
05-23-2014, 02:34 PM
Gary Payton
Reggie Miller
Scottie Pippen
Kevin Garnett
Alonzo Mourning

Kaner
05-23-2014, 02:34 PM
Gary Payton
Ray Allen
Scottie Pippen
Dirk Nowitski
Artis Gilmore


Honestly I think you should take out my 1-3 because they seemed like no brainers to me. Pf and Center was very tough though

edit: forgot about Chris Paul makes pg alot tougher between the two but I'll stick with Payton. Still think that Ray Allen and especially Scottie Pippen should be taken out

abe_froman
05-23-2014, 02:37 PM
since scottie seems so popular,i'll make another with someone just as good/slightly better but doesnt get the recognition.

kidd
drexler
hondo
malone
parish

Kaner
05-23-2014, 02:39 PM
Their is literally nothing that Havlicek does better then Pippen

Minimal
05-23-2014, 02:39 PM
Gary Payton
Ray Allen
Scottie Pippen
Kevin Garnett
Alonzo Mourning

abe_froman
05-23-2014, 02:41 PM
Their is literally nothing that Havlicek does better then Pippen
he could shoulder much more a scoring load when needed and was more clutch than pippen

KnicksorBust
05-23-2014, 02:41 PM
Steve Nash
Vince Carter
Dominique Wilkins
Shawn Kemp
Wes Unseld

We OUT!

JPS
05-23-2014, 02:42 PM
Payton
Drexler
Durant
Barkley
Mutombo

Kaner
05-23-2014, 02:44 PM
he could shoulder much more a scoring load when needed and was more clutch than pippen

He might have shouldered more of a scoring load but that doesn't mean he was a better scorer. A career ts% of 49% does not a good scorer make, Pippen was better everywhere on the court both sides of the ball.

ManRam
05-23-2014, 02:45 PM
Not sure why, almost even regardless of the other 4 pieces, anyone would take Vince over West, Allen, Drexler or even Reggie. But hey, I'm beginning to think I just tend to chronically underrate him.

Chronz
05-23-2014, 02:45 PM
Trying not to be too boring here...

Paul
West

West? As in Logo? Hes banned bro


PS I love Nate. If you can reign in his offense, which I think we should allow considering the magnitude of the team, hes the perfect 5. Focusing solely on his stats and sense of shot selection/skillset, hes like Big Baby on offense, only a better offensive rebounder.

flea
05-23-2014, 02:47 PM
Payton
Allen
Rodman
Barkley
Laimbeer

Chronz
05-23-2014, 02:47 PM
Pippen isn't a GOAT guy but hes probably the GOAT utility team player, should ban him too ehh?


What say you.
yay or nay?

ManRam
05-23-2014, 02:47 PM
Oops. I don't why, but I always view West as a 2. Missed that.

I'll put Ray in there instead.

Paul
Ray
Scottie
Dirk
Thurmond


Not sure how I actually feel about that :laugh2:

Kaner
05-23-2014, 02:51 PM
yay ban Scottie too much versatility and defense for this. With a lack of options at sf he's going to be (and should be) on every team.

HoopsDrive
05-23-2014, 02:52 PM
Gonna try and be original here:

Chris Paul
Tracy McGrady
Grant Hill
Kevin Garnett
Alonzo Mourning

Chronz
05-23-2014, 02:54 PM
He might have shouldered more of a scoring load but that doesn't mean he was a better scorer. A career ts% of 49% does not a good scorer make, Pippen was better everywhere on the court both sides of the ball.

They had no 3's man, you have to compare it to his leagues average which still favors current perimeter players given the rules in place but its a far more fair comparison. Im sure Pippen rates higher regardless but there are always other contextual factors to consider.

Hondo is a fine choice, the only thing is that you really have to forgive shooters for not having as much range as we have today given the lack of incentive for such an inefficient shot without the added point, what matters in terms of spacing back then is that they could occupy defenders and punish defenses for trapping off them. Hondo can provide that with his tireless motor and energy with a good mid range game by todays standards.

abe_froman
05-23-2014, 02:55 PM
He might have shouldered more of a scoring load but that doesn't mean he was a better scorer. A career ts% of 49% does not a good scorer make, Pippen was better everywhere on the court both sides of the ball.
thats without era adjustment,if you adjust for era they come out to having about the same ts%

and no he wasnt ,at the least they are the same

Pippen isn't a GOAT guy but hes probably the GOAT utility team player, should ban him too ehh?


What say you.
yay or nay?
he probably s

and while think its bad to ban him because he isnt super high tier,you probably have to if you want any variety with the line ups

Bruno
05-23-2014, 02:55 PM
Jason Kidd
Reggie Miller
Kevin Durant
Kevin Garnett
Ben Wallace

Chronz
05-23-2014, 02:56 PM
thats without era adjustment,if you adjust for era they come out to having about the same ts%

and no he wasnt ,at the least they are the same

he probably s

and while think its bad to ban him because he isnt super high tier,you probably have to if you want any variety with the line ups

Rodman and Hondo are excellent replacements that put that thought to shame the more I think about it.

Still, Pippen needed his touches, wasn't all that efficient offensively, I hope people understand the skillset overlap that can occur if you have multiple post players / ball handlers.

Hondo can play with anyone and Rodman makes most of his contributions without ever touching a ball, probably the 2nd best at doing that aside from Russell.


Jason Kidd
Reggie Miller
Kevin Durant
Kevin Garnett
Ben Wallace

Thought process?

Kaner
05-23-2014, 03:02 PM
thats without era adjustment,if you adjust for era they come out to having about the same ts%

and no he wasnt ,at the least they are the same



Well I don't adjust for era so I guess there is are differences. But if you do then you also have to adjust his ppg and even without that and assuming greater efficiency his per36 ppg is very close to Scottie's.

Bruno
05-23-2014, 03:02 PM
Jason Kidd
Reggie Miller
Kevin Durant
Kevin Garnett
Ben Wallace

three defensive studs, three good rebounders, three floor spreaders, an offensive post-presence, a defensive anchor (maybe two), elite facilitator, two 'clutch' options at the end of games, three options capable of 25+ ppg and plenty of size.

Bruno
05-23-2014, 03:04 PM
i might like my team with a chris paul/ray allen backcourt better.

Chronz
05-23-2014, 03:06 PM
Not sure why, almost even regardless of the other 4 pieces, anyone would take Vince over West, Allen, Drexler or even Reggie. But hey, I'm beginning to think I just tend to chronically underrate him.

I dont remember your thoughts on the trade for Vince and subsequent trade back for Hedo.

abe_froman
05-23-2014, 03:08 PM
Well I don't adjust for era so I guess there is are differences. But if you do then you also have to adjust his ppg and even without that and assuming greater efficiency his per36 ppg is very close to Scottie's.
it is close ,but still give he edge to hondo because his role(being primary scorer) was that from the decline of jones onward(especially in the post russell era).the defense is about equal and eventhough they were both pointforwards,scottie was more prototypical at it(so slight edge o scottie there).but overall i value ability to take on the primary scoring role over being the best complimentary player ever only....than add in the championship/clutch/leadership pedigree(pippen was never the best player on a champ team,while hondo was on between2-4 of them) and it makes the choice between the two clear to me

Chronz
05-23-2014, 03:11 PM
three defensive studs, three good rebounders, three floor spreaders, an offensive post-presence, a defensive anchor (maybe two), elite facilitator, two 'clutch' options at the end of games, three options capable of 25+ ppg and plenty of size.

That team should crush the glass, Kidd being elite for his position probably matters more than just his average but I wouldn't know how much so. I will try to construct a team that can best this tho

Bruno
05-23-2014, 03:21 PM
That team should crush the glass, Kidd being elite for his position probably matters more than just his average but I wouldn't know how much so. I will try to construct a team that can best this tho
I like reggie as a third option. if you cheat on KD or KG Reg is gona burn ya from three.

in many ways my team is just an enhanced version of the 2008 champion Celtics. Kidd for Rondo, Reggie for Ray, Kd for Pierce, KG for KG and Wallace for Perkins.

Pablonovi
05-23-2014, 03:27 PM
Cheat codes = Tier 1/2 GOAT's at their position

The following cannot be named:




PG
Magic
West
Big O
Isiah
Stockton

SG
MJ
Kobe
Wade

SF
Bron
Bird
Julius

PF
Duncan

C
Kareem
Wilt
Shaq
Russell
Hakeem
Moses
Robinson
Walton







I left out some names because I feel like there would be a debate on who you would take as the next best of the bunch, or which set of skills you would prefer to have complimenting the rest of the team.

Hey High Horse,
This is ONE remarkable list. I think you nailed it as far as the All-Time Top 20.
A couple of more observations.
Note 8 of the 20 are Centers - talk about positional-dominance All-Time (except nowadays, and onwards?)
Only 1 is PF (Duncan) and it's debatable whether he's really a PF or a C. (talk about positional-ANTI-dominance!)

Minor points:
West - I think of him more as a SG (one of the All-Time Greatest Shooters with UNlimied range - what you would have done with the 3 !!!; AND, he WAS the SG all those Gail Goodrich years).

Pippen - He is NOT in the All-Time Top 21 (I don't have him in my Top 30); so you should NOT add him to the OP; i.e., you should NOT keep him off the possible teams in this thread.

IF you start expanding much at all beyond these 20, then you open up the flood gates to any number of the Top 50 not listed here. McHale?? And many others, as we see consistently making other posters' Teams.

btw, if West were to be switched from PG to SG, I'd have him third SG ahead of Wade. West had more Great Years; and a better over-all career, imo.

JordansBulls
05-23-2014, 03:29 PM
Cheat codes = Tier 1/2 GOAT's at their position

The following cannot be named:




PG
Magic
West
Big O
Isiah
Stockton

SG
MJ
Kobe
Wade

SF
Bron
Bird
Julius

PF
Duncan

C
Kareem
Wilt
Shaq
Russell
Hakeem
Moses
Robinson
Walton







I left out some names because I feel like there would be a debate on who you would take as the next best of the bunch, or which set of skills you would prefer to have complimenting the rest of the team.

PG Gary Payton
SG Reggie Miller
SF Kevin Durant
PF Kevin Garnett
C Patrick Ewing

Jamiecballer
05-23-2014, 03:38 PM
is this a one game thing, or an 82 game thing.

because if it's 82 game i feel like most of these teams would be massive underachievers because of a lack of offensive hierarchy and ego.

Pablonovi
05-23-2014, 03:40 PM
If those 2 teams were to square off, I honestly dont know who I would favor.

I had a feeling Ewing might have been worthy of being blacklisted but he had his lapses. Still, if hes too popular, maybe we should go without him. Personally, I'd take Reed ahead of him.

Hey High Horse,
I feel pretty strongly that after the Top 8 Centers (you listed) one just can't really claim that, amongst all the other All-Star centers, one clearly stands out.
What about the A-Train (Artis Gilmore, for example). I go back and forth between Ewing and Reed (just amongst the Knicks). (A couple of more centers that don't get mentioned much: Dan Issel & Mel Daniels (both of whom did excellent work in the ABA when it was about equal to the NBA in quality).

Jamiecballer
05-23-2014, 03:40 PM
Jason Kidd
Reggie Miller
Kevin Durant
Kevin Garnett
Ben Wallace
this is the only one i see that wouldn't self destruct IMO

Kaner
05-23-2014, 03:41 PM
it is close ,but still give he edge to hondo because his role(being primary scorer) was that from the decline of jones onward(especially in the post russell era).the defense is about equal and eventhough they were both pointforwards,scottie was more prototypical at it(so slight edge o scottie there).but overall i value ability to take on the primary scoring role over being the best complimentary player ever only....than add in the championship/clutch/leadership pedigree(pippen was never the best player on a champ team,while hondo was on between2-4 of them) and it makes the choice between the two clear to me

First: The defense is not about equal Hondo was a great defender but isn't in Pippen's class on defense. He's undersized by todays standards and likely not nearly as athletic as any of the other all-time wing defenders.

Second: I think most teams where you can have Dirk, Barkley, Ray Allen, Drexler, Malone don't want nor need their ineffiecent sf to take the primary scoring role.

Pablonovi
05-23-2014, 03:42 PM
is this a one game thing, or an 82 game thing.

because if it's 82 game i feel like most of these teams would be massive underachievers because of a lack of offensive hierarchy and ego.

Hey Jamiecballer,
I've been assuming an NBA 7-Game Finals scenario.
It is plenty interesting to start thinking about a full Regular Season scenario - but much more complicated (you'd really want to see, at least, the 3 key subs off the bench, no?)

Kaner
05-23-2014, 03:50 PM
A team of guys I haven't seen but think could be competitive.

Chauncey Billups
Joe Dumars
George Gervin
Kevin Mchale
Dikembe Mutombo

papipapsmanny
05-23-2014, 03:52 PM
Walt Frazier
Tracy McGrady
Kevin Durant
Karl Malone
Patrick Ewing

Tony_Starks
05-23-2014, 03:52 PM
Tim Hardaway
TMac
Marion
Sheed
Mutumbo

Jamiecballer
05-23-2014, 04:08 PM
Billups
Carter
Bowen
Nowitzki
Mutumbo

jericho
05-23-2014, 04:22 PM
Not the greateat team but it would be one fun team to watch.

Cp3
Vinsanity
T-Mac
C-Webb
Divac

nandovelez
05-23-2014, 04:27 PM
Pg. Kidd
Sg. Allen
SF. Marion
Pf. Kg.
C. Sabonis
For the heck of it lol

Bruno
05-23-2014, 04:33 PM
this is the only one i see that wouldn't self destruct IMO

hardest part is making the pieces fit. I'm using a template that has proven to win a championship, with enhanced individuals at each position. my team is a more talented version of the 2008 celtics.

Pablonovi
05-23-2014, 04:48 PM
hardest part is making the pieces fit. I'm using a template that has proven to win a championship, with enhanced individuals at each position. my team is a more talented version of the 2008 celtics.

Hey Bruno,
I was just this moment about to suggest the people posit Teams composed of members from only one Franchise.
Even without the 20 All-Time GOAT-ers from the OP, both the Lakers and C's could field pretty good teams & might have great chemistry.

Bostonjorge
05-23-2014, 05:17 PM
PG Penney
SG Richmond
SF Barry
PF Worthy
C Yao

Pablonovi
05-23-2014, 06:14 PM
(minus these 6 from the All-Time 20 Greatest: Kobe, Magic, KAJ, West, Wilt & Shaq)
All-Time Lakers Team (14 members)

C: G. Mikan, M. Thomson, B. McAdoo
PF: P. Gasol, L. Odom, H. Harriston, A.C. Green
SF: E. Baylor, J. Worthy, J. Wilkes
SG: B. Scott, M. Cooper
PG: G. Goodrich, N. Nixon

Pablonovi
05-23-2014, 06:25 PM
(minus these 2 from the All-Time 20 Greatest : Bill Russel, Larry Bird)
All-Time Celtics Team (14 members)

C: D. Cowens, R. Parrish,
PF: K. Garnett, K. McHale,
SF: J. Havlicek, P. Pierce, T. Heinsohn
SG: Jo Jo White, Sam Jones, D. Johnson
PG: B. Cousy, N. Archibald, B. Sharman, D. Ainge

JesusNYY_Savior
05-23-2014, 06:32 PM
AI
Ray Allen
Rodman
KG
Mutumbo
Enough offense and defense

Pablonovi
05-23-2014, 07:09 PM
AI
Ray Allen
Rodman
KG
Mutumbo
Enough offense and defense

Hey JesusNYY_Savior,
Not nearly enough offense (particularly from your bigs); not nearly enough D (AI and Ray Ray aren't going to stop anybody - that's way too much of a burden to put on your D).

The biggest single problem I have with this team is that I don't see AI as the PG on any team that has great team-work.

That may not read so well; I mean to say is that any "super-team" with AI as its PG is not gonna have good enough teamwork to beat any relatively equally individually-talented "super-team".

Shammyguy3
05-23-2014, 07:36 PM
I love these types of threads. Here's my team:
Billups - Allen - Pippen - Dirk - Mourning

Raidaz4Life
05-23-2014, 08:04 PM
PG: Chris Paul
SG: Chris Mullin
SF: Kevin Durant
PF: Kevin Garnett
C: Dikembe Mutumbo

mdm692
05-23-2014, 08:05 PM
For me

Nash
VC
Grant Hill
KG
Ewing
I totally forgot about KG. Pencil him in over Barkley.

Bench of KJ-Reggie-Marion-Stat-Sheed

Yeah the Suns fan in me took over :p.

mdm692
05-23-2014, 08:09 PM
yay ban Scottie too much versatility and defense for this. With a lack of options at sf he's going to be (and should be) on every team.

That's what I was thinking as well that's why I chose Hill.

Bostonjorge
05-23-2014, 09:24 PM
After all the players listed I take KG as best player available. His D his first year in Boston triumphs pippen's D.

Pablonovi
05-23-2014, 09:43 PM
After all the players listed I take KG as best player available. His D his first year in Boston triumphs pippen's D.

Hey Bj,
I don't know about "best player available" (like 21st All-Time Greatest); but I'd definitely rank him higher than Pippen; in fact, come to think of it, you might be right. I have him in my top 25.

Seems to me, his D and O were both even better before he joined the C's; but didn't get him near the recognition because his TEAM just wasn't good enough to make much Play Off noise (can't make much if you don't even qualify too).

ricky recon
05-23-2014, 09:46 PM
Gary Payton
Reggie Miller
Scottie Pippen
Dirk Nowitzki
Patrick Ewing

Pablonovi
05-23-2014, 10:04 PM
Gary Payton
Reggie Miller
Scottie Pippen
Dirk Nowitzki
Patrick Ewing

Hey ricky recon,
Solid team.
Why Reggie over Ray Ray (just asking, definitely not criticizing - the difference can't be great)

The_Jamal
05-23-2014, 10:35 PM
PG: Nash
SG: Ray Allen
SF: Kevin Durant
PF: Dirk Nowitzki
C: Alonzo Mourning

D sucks, but who cares. Good luck trying to stop that floor spacing and KD+Dirk.

Pablonovi
05-23-2014, 10:49 PM
PG: Nash
SG: Ray Allen
SF: Kevin Durant
PF: Dirk Nowitzki
C: Alonzo Mourning

D sucks, but who cares. Good luck trying to stop that floor spacing and KD+Dirk.

Hey The_Jamal,
I knew something was missing from all these lists: pure "O".
I love high scoring games way more than low-scoring ones.
First team to 150 wins! (Nash with 20+ assist a game, during entire Regular Seasons, whooppie !)

Heck, maybe you just wanna go "small ball"; pull A.M. , and throw in another ace shooter: Rick Barry? (he's also a great passer and genius b-ball mind).

NJrockPD
05-23-2014, 11:16 PM
Payton
Mcgrady
Pippen
Malone
Howard

Great defense, great offense with a Prime McGrady, Payton, Pippen, and Malone. Howard would make up for any deficiencies in the paint on defense.

Bostonjorge
05-23-2014, 11:57 PM
Hey Bj,
I don't know about "best player available" (like 21st All-Time Greatest); but I'd definitely rank him higher than Pippen; in fact, come to think of it, you might be right. I have him in my top 25.

Seems to me, his D and O were both even better before he joined the C's; but didn't get him near the recognition because his TEAM just wasn't good enough to make much Play Off noise (can't make much if you don't even qualify too).

I take KG over Stockton, Walton, mosses and wade all players who where listed.

Kashmir13579
05-24-2014, 12:00 AM
Frazier
Tmac
Pippen
Dirk
Noah

Kashmir13579
05-24-2014, 12:01 AM
Jason Kidd
Reggie Miller
Kevin Durant
Kevin Garnett
Ben Wallace Miller! Good choice.

SwatTeam
05-24-2014, 12:14 AM
PG: Pistol Pete - 6'5"
SG: Ray Allen - 6'5"
SF: Kevin Durant - 6'10"
PF: Karl Malone - 6'9"
C: Alonzo Mourning - 6'10"

The Pistol both played the 1 and 2 in his career. But I'm using him at the 1 here. He also won the scoring title in 77. Some might argue he's not a true PG. Oh well, Im going for flashy assists with him in the lineup. With this team I thought spacing was important. 2 guys down low and 2 guys to spot up and spread the defense out. Ray Ray and Durantula stay on the perimeter; Malone and Zo bang down low. Pistol dishing out sick assists (sports center worthy in todays world) and picking up the scoring slack when needed.

Only problem is our height. The guards are big, but we got small guys inside. Hoping their toughness/grit will prevail. I mean KD is probably the tallest dude on the team, and I'll have him outside on the perimeter.

Bostonjorge
05-24-2014, 12:18 AM
PG The professor
SG Earl The Goat
SF Pee wee Kirkland
PF Lenny cooke
C Dwight

Shlumpledink
05-24-2014, 12:23 AM
Gary Payton
Michael Cooper
Scottie Pippen
Kevin Garnett
Patrick Ewing

Pablonovi
05-24-2014, 12:26 AM
I take KG over Stockton, Walton, mosses and wade all players who where listed.

Hey Bj,
I do have KG over both Walton and DWade. The reason (I guessing and supporting) that High Horse, our OP, put Walton in the All-Time Top 20, is because his short-lived "Peak" was phenomenal - his best two years were better than KG's best 2 years. I don't think either KG or Moses was way better than the other - call it close to even.

I don't know about Stockton - the guy was easily one of the All-Time Best Team-Mates (a huge factor in my book); and ranks #1 in TWO individual career stats (one defensive and one offensive) neither of which may ever be broken or even closely approached. On certain hypothetical "super-teams", I might put him in as PG over even Magic (he was THE better defender).

All in all, I'm mostly nit-picking with you - you position is a "worthy" one.

5ass
05-24-2014, 01:03 AM
Paul
Tmac
Durant
Malone
Rasheed Wallace

JeffG20
05-24-2014, 01:26 AM
Nevermind...

WadeCounty
05-24-2014, 01:33 AM
PG- Iverson
SG- Reggie Miller
SF- Eddie Jones
PF- Karl Malone
C- Mutombo

Wanted to try something different

JeffG20
05-24-2014, 02:28 AM
Eh, debated.... but why not

Penny Hardaway
Reggie Miller
Kevin Durant
Anthony Davis
Yao Ming


That height/length aint no joke

WatWoudJordanDo
05-24-2014, 03:04 AM
Kidd
VC
Pippen
Dirk
Dwight

HouRealCoach
05-24-2014, 04:58 AM
Payton
Allen
Pippen
KG
Yao Ming

FraziersKnicks
05-24-2014, 05:04 AM
Walt Frazier
Reggie Miller
Scottie Pippen
Kevin Garnett
Patrick Ewing

Defensive juggernaut

Yumboldt
05-24-2014, 05:55 AM
Chris Paul
Ray Allen
Bruce Bowen
Kevin Love
Dwight Howard

PurpleLynch
05-24-2014, 06:21 AM
Cp3
Allen
Pippen
Webb
Noah


The ball movement should be unreal lol

YoungOne
05-24-2014, 06:23 AM
rondo
allen
pierce
garnett
yao

lol

Jamiecballer
05-24-2014, 10:57 AM
Cp3
Allen
Pippen
Webb
Noah


The ball movement should be unreal lol

I actually really really like this though I'd like it even more with kidd

tredigs
05-24-2014, 11:14 AM
PG: Steph Curry
SG: Joe Dumars
SF: Scottie Pippen
PF: KG
C: Nate The Great Thurmond

Phenomenonsense
05-24-2014, 11:35 AM
Billups
Rip
Prince
Sheed
Ben Wallace

el oh el

PurpleLynch
05-24-2014, 11:38 AM
I actually really really like this though I'd like it even more with kidd

I was unsure about the PG too(I was torn,my choices were Cp3,Kidd,Payton)

Pablonovi
05-24-2014, 12:51 PM
PG- Iverson
SG- Reggie Miller
SF- Eddie Jones
PF- Karl Malone
C- Mutombo

Wanted to try something different

Hey WC,
Interesting.
Why E.J. (and at SF) ?

49ersLALSFGiant
05-24-2014, 01:56 PM
Cp3
Tmac
Pippen
KG
Zo

That would be one hell of a defensive team

Reyes6
05-24-2014, 01:58 PM
PG- Frazier
SG- Iceman
SF- Baylor
PF- Garnett
C- Mutombo


I would love to see a defensive paint of KG and Deke.

Pablonovi
05-24-2014, 03:12 PM
PG- Frazier
SG- Iceman
SF- Baylor
PF- Garnett
C- Mutombo


I would love to see a defensive paint of KG and Deke.

Hey Reyes6,
So would I.

Ahhh! Finally someone giving the Great Elgin his due!
Did you get to see him play?
Before MJ, before Doc, before Hawk ... there was Elgin Baylor, the FIRST of the great, hang-time-flying small forwards.

My All-Time Favorite Dunk: Elgin goes flying across the key, side to side to dunk. Wilt's there to stuff both him and the ball. Elgin, still gliding, flips the ball to his other hand; and MoFo's the crap out of the ball. Never seen it in a video; did see it "live" on TV. (I saw his entire career. His gorgeous black-white teamwork with West was what made me fall in the love with the NBA, back in the dark days of open racial hatreds and beatings and "the 3 Bathroom System" (at least in the South).

(And in the North, the dual-cheerleader "system"; whereby the white cheerleaders (& fans) would root ONLY for the white players and the black cheerleaders (& fans) would root ONLY for the black players ON THE SAME TEAM!)

Chronz
05-24-2014, 04:30 PM
I probably criminally underrate Elgin Baylor because of how he and Butch tarnished Wilt's legacy

hugepatsfan
05-24-2014, 04:33 PM
PG: Walt Frazier
SG: Ray Allen
SF: Scottie Pippen
PF: Dirk Nowitski
C: Alonzo Mourning

Pablonovi
05-24-2014, 05:45 PM
I probably criminally underrate Elgin Baylor because of how he and Butch tarnished Wilt's legacy

Hey High Horse,
Care to elaborate? (I hadn't heard about this)

Pablonovi
05-24-2014, 05:58 PM
I probably criminally underrate Elgin Baylor because of how he and Butch tarnished Wilt's legacy

Hey High Horse,
It is pretty much the case that every single televised game (lots weren't back then) of Baylor's career - I watched it. I considered him so great that, to this day, I can't really say for sure how I'd rank: West "O" and Baylor - they were all phenomenal, way ahead of their times and "about equal" imo. Speaking specifically about Baylor - he was literally unstoppable on offense - and, on top of that, a true artist with virtually unlimited successful moves with which to score. That's a key thing people don't know about him - his virtuosity and his multi-talented offense. (His defense, while not extraordinary like his O was; was very high-quality - he was among the most complete players ever.

Of the 5 All-Time Greats from that era: Wilt, West, "O", Baylor & Russell, I have it:
Wilt (most era-dominant player ever) clearly a good deal better than the rest of them.

Russell (could very have been the most dominant defensive player ever - although Wilt's D was incredible - tons of shots were not even attempted because of his amazing athletic ability) still he was completely a one-sided player - AND, as bagwell often says, if he had been on any number of other teams, might very well have gotten zero Chips. I (independent of bagwell, and way earlier than him) maintain that those C's teams were All-Star teams and THAT PLUS RED were why Russell appears so great (they had the highest percent of the NBA's best players of any team ever). Wilt's teams lost a number of Game 7s, that's how close those series were; despite, in most cases, Russell's teams were collective decidedly better.

Heck, Wilt's averages of ppg and rpg Vs Russell (and his All-Star teams) were only slightly lower than he did against the rest of the League. Russell, in some 140 head-to-heads Vs Wilt NEVER stopped, or even slowed him - Wilt was WAY better than Russell.

West, "O" and Baylor, imo, were all clearly not as great as Wilt and all clearly better than Russell. (btw, vis-ŕ-vis compared to Russell, only in regards Baylor, do bagwell and I differ).

Bruno
05-24-2014, 08:24 PM
Hey High Horse,
It is pretty much the case that every single televised game (lots weren't back then) of Baylor's career - I watched it. I considered him so great that, to this day, I can't really say for sure how I'd rank: West "O" and Baylor - they were all phenomenal, way ahead of their times and "about equal" imo. Speaking specifically about Baylor - he was literally unstoppable on offense - and, on top of that, a true artist with virtually unlimited successful moves with which to score. That's a key thing people don't know about him - his virtuosity and his multi-talented offense. (His defense, while not extraordinary like his O was; was very high-quality - he was among the most complete players ever.

Of the 5 All-Time Greats from that era: Wilt, West, "O", Baylor & Russell, I have it:
Wilt (most era-dominant player ever) clearly a good deal better than the rest of them.

Russell (could very have been the most dominant defensive player ever - although Wilt's D was incredible - tons of shots were not even attempted because of his amazing athletic ability) still he was completely a one-sided player - AND, as bagwell often says, if he had been on any number of other teams, might very well have gotten zero Chips. I (independent of bagwell, and way earlier than him) maintain that those C's teams were All-Star teams and THAT PLUS RED were why Russell appears so great (they had the highest percent of the NBA's best players of any team ever). Wilt's teams lost a number of Game 7s, that's how close those series were; despite, in most cases, Russell's teams were collective decidedly better.

Heck, Wilt's averages of ppg and rpg Vs Russell (and his All-Star teams) were only slightly lower than he did against the rest of the League. Russell, in some 140 head-to-heads Vs Wilt NEVER stopped, or even slowed him - Wilt was WAY better than Russell.

West, "O" and Baylor, imo, were all clearly not as great as Wilt and all clearly better than Russell. (btw, vis-ŕ-vis compared to Russell, only in regards Baylor, do bagwell and I differ).

Wilt is underrated. the fact that he's score 100 points and averaged 50/25 for a season... i think it makes it more difficult to argue in favor of him for anyway. the numbers are so off the charts everyone just dismisses it as a result of the era, then we start talking about era instead of how dominant he was. i think wilts the second best player ever, and that the only thing between him and MJ is the perfect story book career arch.

Pablonovi
05-24-2014, 10:03 PM
Wilt is underrated. the fact that he's score 100 points and averaged 50/25 for a season... i think it makes it more difficult to argue in favor of him for anyway. the numbers are so off the charts everyone just dismisses it as a result of the era, then we start talking about era instead of how dominant he was. i think wilts the second best player ever, and that the only thing between him and MJ is the perfect story book career arch.

Hey Bruno,
I've "got" Wilt as THE Greatest Athlete of the entire 20th Century. He was super: strong & with unequaled stamina (both on the court and in bed), fast (probably THE fastest guy in the League at the time) & quick (different things, quick = explosive). He blew Arnold Swartzenner away in the weight room (and he had NEVER lifted before then; so this was despite crappy form.) He was a terrific high jumper ... it goes on and on.

I've got him #4 - but I'd have him higher if his teams could have only won some more (oh so close) Game 7s. I just can't put him in the top 3 with only two Chips.

Pablonovi
05-24-2014, 10:06 PM
Wilt is underrated. the fact that he's score 100 points and averaged 50/25 for a season... i think it makes it more difficult to argue in favor of him for anyway. the numbers are so off the charts everyone just dismisses it as a result of the era, then we start talking about era instead of how dominant he was. i think wilts the second best player ever, and that the only thing between him and MJ is the perfect story book career arch.

Hey Bruno,
I loved MJ when he played; and it doesn't sit well with me to say much against him; but:
1) He only had 11 Great Seasons (KAJ had 50% more; and 4 More Finals (these two things are HUGE); AND the Greatest Shot ever).
2) He was not a great team mate (Magic was way better; and had 3 More Finals).
3) He quit to not be banned from the League for gambling. I hold this against him - it was his fault entirely that he didn't play 1.5+ years.

_Gmen_
05-24-2014, 10:13 PM
Tyson Chandler
Blake Griffin
Carmelo Anthony
Ray Allen
Chris Paul

WadeCounty
05-24-2014, 11:25 PM
remaking another team

pg: Tony Parker
sg: Clyde Drexler
sf: Scottie Pippen
pf: Karl Malone
c: Ewing

MonroeFAN
05-25-2014, 01:10 AM
Payton
Iverson
Pippen
Dirk
Ewing

This team wins championship until they retire.

MonroeFAN
05-25-2014, 01:11 AM
Tyson Chandler
Blake Griffin
Carmelo Anthony
Ray Allen
Chris Paul


Potentially this team too. I like the modern day roster.

zachsaints52
05-25-2014, 01:14 AM
Payton
Iverson
Pippen
Dirk
Ewing

This team is flat out sexy.

amos1er
05-25-2014, 01:27 AM
Edit, just read the OP.

amos1er
05-25-2014, 01:30 AM
PG: Nash
SG: T-Mac
SF: Pippen
PF: Malone
C: Ewing

amos1er
05-25-2014, 01:42 AM
I probably criminally underrate Elgin Baylor because of how he and Butch tarnished Wilt's legacy

Don't know how much his legacy was tarnished, he is arguably 2-5 on most lists. No way was he passing Jordan for the one spot.

Kaner
05-25-2014, 02:38 AM
Another question this has gotten me thinking about is after the guys banned whose the best offensive option available? Because that's the guy I think you should build your team around.

I think it's Dirk but T-mac, Gervin, Malone, Barkley, or even Durant and Drexler could have a case I think.

With that said I like making different teams so

Cp3
Cooper
Pippen
Dirk
Mourning

found it very tough to decide between Mourning, Gilmore, or Mutombo for this team.

Jamiecballer
05-25-2014, 09:19 AM
Doug Christie
Allen Iverson
Bruce Bowen
Ben Wallace
Dikembe Mutumbo

Pablonovi
05-25-2014, 01:56 PM
Another question this has gotten me thinking about is after the guys banned whose the best offensive option available? Because that's the guy I think you should build your team around.

I think it's Dirk but T-mac, Gervin, Malone, Barkley, or even Durant and Drexler could have a case I think.

With that said I like making different teams so

Cp3
Cooper
Pippen
Dirk
Mourning

found it very tough to decide between Mourning, Gilmore, or Mutombo for this team.

Hey Kaner,
Nobody gonna score on this bad-azz D !
While Dirk will average 40+ ! (and without working up a sweat).

Pablonovi
05-25-2014, 01:58 PM
Doug Christie
Allen Iverson
Bruce Bowen
Ben Wallace
Dikembe Mutumbo

Hey Jamiecballer,
I loved D.C.'s style on the hardwood.
But what makes YOU put him on your squad; just dying to know, is all.

Jamiecballer
05-25-2014, 02:07 PM
I don't like the idea of Iverson being a point guard so I needed a big PG with the ability to defend both positions.

Of course there are lots of those but my goal was to create a better version of the 2001 76ers. That IMO is the model for how you succeed with guys like Iverson or Melo who treat the game like a personal challenge to score every time they touch the ball.

Instead of trying to change the player, embrace it. So I want a point guard who is a competent ball handler but won't be in competition with Iverson for touches. Same goes for the rest of the lineup.

Bruno
05-25-2014, 02:14 PM
Hey Bruno,
I've "got" Wilt as THE Greatest Athlete of the entire 20th Century. He was super: strong & with unequaled stamina (both on the court and in bed), fast (probably THE fastest guy in the League at the time) & quick (different things, quick = explosive). He blew Arnold Swartzenner away in the weight room (and he had NEVER lifted before then; so this was despite crappy form.) He was a terrific high jumper ... it goes on and on.

I've got him #4 - but I'd have him higher if his teams could have only won some more (oh so close) Game 7s. I just can't put him in the top 3 with only two Chips.

haha, i hold that against MJ too. I think KAJ has a fine argument over Wilt, for years I placed KAJ over Wilt and have only recently changed my preference.

for my liking, I don't put Magic Johnson that high. I understand that he was majestically good on offense, but he wasn't a dominant player on the defensive end. zero NBA defensive teams throughout his career. I can't put a guy in the top three in league history if he didn't dominate both sides of the ball. for me to do that, he'd have to be so exponentially better than other options on offense to make up for the discrepancy, and he wasn't (you can't say Magic Johnson was exponentially better than Wilt, or other top ten options on offense). I punish Russell in my rankings for the exact same reason, but because he wasn't a dominant offensive player. but, to each his own :cheers:

Pablonovi
05-25-2014, 02:47 PM
haha, i hold that against MJ too. I think KAJ has a fine argument over Wilt, for years I placed KAJ over Wilt and have only recently changed my preference.

for my liking, I don't put Magic Johnson that high. I understand that he was majestically good on offense, but he wasn't a dominant player on the defensive end. zero NBA defensive teams throughout his career. I can't put a guy in the top three in league history if he didn't dominate both sides of the ball. for me to do that, he'd have to be so exponentially better than other options on offense to make up for the discrepancy, and he wasn't (you can't say Magic Johnson was exponentially better than Wilt, or other top ten options on offense). I punish Russell in my rankings for the exact same reason, but because he wasn't a dominant offensive player. but, to each his own :cheers:

Hey Bruno,
As usual, a post of yours that represents near-excellent thinking!

You are absolutely right about Magic. My ONLY counter-argument would be: he was the GOAT TEAM-mate; and I, personally, speaking for myself as usual (hehe), count THAT as my #1 "measuring stick".

The way I look at my All-Time GOAT Top 4: KAJ, Magic, MJ, Wilt (with LBJ (with an additional Chip) knocking on door #5) is that:
Anybody who has those 4 Greats within their All-Time GOAT Top 5 (in whatever order) - is fine by me.

Anybody who thinks any of those 4 is NOT an All-Time GOAT Top 5er; well, as Hall & Oates would say,
"I can't go for that!, no-oh-oh!"

OlivaThor
05-25-2014, 02:56 PM
PG: Payton
SG: Allen
SF: Pippen
PF: Dirk
C: Walton

roshan3ai
05-25-2014, 03:09 PM
Assuming prime players and without looking at anyone else's, my best guess right now is:

C: Patrick Ewing
PF: Dirk Nowitzki
SF: Scottie Pippen
SG: Ray Allen
PG: Gary Payton

jerellh528
05-25-2014, 03:14 PM
Chris paul
Reggie miller
Tracy mcgrady
Kevin Garnett
Patrick Ewing
:cool:

roshan3ai
05-25-2014, 03:19 PM
Another one I really like is:

C: Nate Thurmond
PF: Charles Barkley
SF: Scottie Pippen
SG: Ray Allen
PG: Chris Paul

Pablonovi
05-25-2014, 03:41 PM
Another one I really like is:

C: Nate Thurmond
PF: Charles Barkley
SF: Scottie Pippen
SG: Ray Allen
PG: Chris Paul

Hey roshan3ai,
I got to see all of Nate The Great's career.
I'd be hard-pressed to name anybody who was simultaneously:
As Great As Nate
AND
As Little-Well Known (nowadays)

You can NOT go wrong with him as your defensive anchor! (He, of course, could "get his" on the O end too).

amos1er
05-25-2014, 05:31 PM
haha, i hold that against MJ too. I think KAJ has a fine argument over Wilt, for years I placed KAJ over Wilt and have only recently changed my preference.

for my liking, I don't put Magic Johnson that high. I understand that he was majestically good on offense, but he wasn't a dominant player on the defensive end. zero NBA defensive teams throughout his career. I can't put a guy in the top three in league history if he didn't dominate both sides of the ball. for me to do that, he'd have to be so exponentially better than other options on offense to make up for the discrepancy, and he wasn't (you can't say Magic Johnson was exponentially better than Wilt, or other top ten options on offense). I punish Russell in my rankings for the exact same reason, but because he wasn't a dominant offensive player. but, to each his own :cheers:

Russell's offense is not a good comparison to Magic's defense. Russell was nothing short of a liability on offense while Magic, even though not a great defender was still a good defender. Russell was absolutely abysmal on offense for a big man shooting around 45% from the field. If he was still playing, he would be only good for put backs and tip ins. He was a D- caliber offensive player. Magic was never an elite defender, but he was far from a liability on that end. He was more than capable of guarding the other teams opposing players on any given night and he could truly guard all 5 positions. He was a B caliber defender. So it's not really a good comparison to say that Russell's deficiencies on the offensive end are comparable to Magic's on the defensive end. Just because Magic was not an elite defender and didn't make an all defensive team in his career, doesn't mean that he was as big a detriment as Russell was on the offensive end.

Magic is the force that drove the Lakers, while Russell was very fortunate to be gifted the best teams in the league for a span of 15 years... His whole career essentially. Magic had great teams too, but none with the disparity in talent that Russell had over the league during his reign. Russell could be replaced by a plethora of big men and the Celts would have still been nearly as successful. Though I will say it's debatable if they could have gotten all 11 in 15 years. Still, Magic was the driving force behind the Lakers showtime dominance in the 1980's. There are few players who could have ran that system to that perfection and have gotten as good results. In fact, I would say that there are none other than him. He extended Kareem's career and made all the others around him better. I don't really see anyone that could have had his degree of success with that cast in that era other than him. It was truly amazing. Magic is surely a 2-5 top player of all-time for sure.

Pablonovi
05-25-2014, 06:43 PM
Russell's offense is not a good comparison to Magic's defense. Russell was nothing short of a liability on offense while Magic, even though not a great defender was still a good defender. Russell was absolutely abysmal on offense for a big man shooting around 45% from the field. If he was still playing, he would be only good for put backs and tip ins. He was a D- caliber offensive player. Magic was never an elite defender, but he was far from a liability on that end. He was more than capable of guarding the other teams opposing players on any given night and he could truly guard all 5 positions. He was a B caliber defender. So it's not really a good comparison to say that Russell's deficiencies on the offensive end are comparable to Magic's on the defensive end. Just because Magic was not an elite defender and didn't make an all defensive team in his career, doesn't mean that he was as big a detriment as Russell was on the offensive end.

Magic is the force that drove the Lakers, while Russell was very fortunate to be gifted the best teams in the league for a span of 15 years... His whole career essentially. Magic had great teams too, but none with the disparity in talent that Russell had over the league during his reign. Russell could be replaced by a plethora of big men and the Celts would have still been nearly as successful. Though I will say it's debatable if they could have gotten all 11 in 15 years. Still, Magic was the driving force behind the Lakers showtime dominance in the 1980's. There are few players who could have ran that system to that perfection and have gotten as good results. In fact, I would say that there are none other than him. He extended Kareem's career and made all the others around him better. I don't really see anyone that could have had his degree of success with that cast in that era other than him. It was truly amazing. Magic is surely a 2-5 top player of all-time for sure.

Hey amos1er,
It’s posts like this that make me feel pure-honor to be a fellow PSD-er with you. BRAVO!

I would only add a HUGE additional something that you probably very well know, but just didn’t mention: RED.
Red Auerbach was THE MOST AHEAD-OF-HIS-TIME COACH/GM EVER (in the NBA, maybe in any sport).
He alone was worth a number of points per game to the C’s; and considering they won many close Play Off games; several Game 7s; some games in overtime. He contributed GREATLY to those 11 Chips (even when he stepped down, he was still definitely guiding.

P.S. For those who don't know/remember, I'm a 55+ years rabid Lakers' fan; so I absolutely hated RED; but I never once doubted his greatness - kudos where kudos are due.

Miltstar
05-25-2014, 07:12 PM
Allen Iverson
Tracy McGrady
Vince Carter
Shawn Kemp
Dikembe Mutumbo

curtcocaine
05-25-2014, 07:52 PM
Penny Hardaway/ steph curry
Ray allen/ tracy magraty
Paul george/ Carmelo Anthony
Kevin durant/ scottie pimpin
Dwight howard/ deandre jordan

Pablonovi
05-25-2014, 07:56 PM
Allen Iverson
Tracy McGrady
Vince Carter
Shawn Kemp
Dikembe Mutumbo

Hey Miltstar,
Any team with the cousins, I just gotta love. (Boy should they ever have stayed together!)

But will AI be willing / able to be "only" an equal part in a "3-Headed Offensive Monster"???
I have my doubts; but I could be wrong.

PurpleLynch
05-25-2014, 08:20 PM
Just use C-Webb at PF and you have a strong and fun team to play with :cool:

Auseranami
05-25-2014, 08:40 PM
Jason Kidd
Tracy mcgrady
Charles Barkley
Kevin Garnett
Alonzo mourning

Miltstar
05-25-2014, 09:15 PM
Hey Miltstar,
Any team with the cousins, I just gotta love. (Boy should they ever have stayed together!)

But will AI be willing / able to be "only" an equal part in a "3-Headed Offensive Monster"???
I have my doubts; but I could be wrong.

4 headed with Kemp in his prime, Mutumbo is there for defense and rebounds, honostly whoever gets the ball should just go straight to the hole and either dish or score

Miltstar
05-25-2014, 09:21 PM
Stephan Marbury
Steve Francis
Latrell Sprewell
Dennis Rodman
Bill Lambeer

Bobby Knight head coach

amos1er
05-25-2014, 09:59 PM
Hey amos1er,
It’s posts like this that make me feel pure-honor to be a fellow PSD-er with you. BRAVO!

I would only add a HUGE additional something that you probably very well know, but just didn’t mention: RED.
Red Auerbach was THE MOST AHEAD-OF-HIS-TIME COACH/GM EVER (in the NBA, maybe in any sport).
He alone was worth a number of points per game to the C’s; and considering they won many close Play Off games; several Game 7s; some games in overtime. He contributed GREATLY to those 11 Chips (even when he stepped down, he was still definitely guiding.

P.S. For those who don't know/remember, I'm a 55+ years rabid Lakers' fan; so I absolutely hated RED; but I never once doubted his greatness - kudos where kudos are due.

Why thank you sir. Glad to know that some people appreciate my posting/opinions around here. I personally think that Red is the third greatest coach of all time under Phil and Pop. Good to know you a fellow fan of the Purple and Gold. Just means that you know what good basketball truly is. :)

Kashmir13579
05-25-2014, 10:31 PM
Stephan Marbury
Steve Francis
Latrell Sprewell
Dennis Rodman
Bill Lambeer

Bobby Knight head coach I'd put starbury at the 2

alexander_37
05-26-2014, 12:29 AM
Payton
Drexler
Wilkins
KG
Laimbeer

bench

Penny
Tmac
Pippen
Kemp
Mutumbo

talk about an energy lineup lol

Bostonjorge
05-26-2014, 12:48 AM
Triangle offense

PG Pippen
SG KD
SF Dirk
PF Webber
C KG

Chronz
05-26-2014, 09:40 AM
Don't know how much his legacy was tarnished, he is arguably 2-5 on most lists. No way was he passing Jordan for the one spot.
Arguing for Wilt would be alot easier if he even had some sort of luck in those close games they lost.


Hey High Horse,
Care to elaborate? (I hadn't heard about this)

They clashed on and off the court. Butch favored the incumbent over the champion and thats why the Lakers never won during the final Baylor days.


Hey High Horse,
It is pretty much the case that every single televised game (lots weren't back then) of Baylor's career - I watched it. I considered him so great that, to this day, I can't really say for sure how I'd rank: West "O" and Baylor - they were all phenomenal, way ahead of their times and "about equal" imo. Speaking specifically about Baylor - he was literally unstoppable on offense - and, on top of that, a true artist with virtually unlimited successful moves with which to score. That's a key thing people don't know about him - his virtuosity and his multi-talented offense. (His defense, while not extraordinary like his O was; was very high-quality - he was among the most complete players ever.

Of the 5 All-Time Greats from that era: Wilt, West, "O", Baylor & Russell, I have it:
Wilt (most era-dominant player ever) clearly a good deal better than the rest of them.

Russell (could very have been the most dominant defensive player ever - although Wilt's D was incredible - tons of shots were not even attempted because of his amazing athletic ability) still he was completely a one-sided player - AND, as bagwell often says, if he had been on any number of other teams, might very well have gotten zero Chips. I (independent of bagwell, and way earlier than him) maintain that those C's teams were All-Star teams and THAT PLUS RED were why Russell appears so great (they had the highest percent of the NBA's best players of any team ever). Wilt's teams lost a number of Game 7s, that's how close those series were; despite, in most cases, Russell's teams were collective decidedly better.

Heck, Wilt's averages of ppg and rpg Vs Russell (and his All-Star teams) were only slightly lower than he did against the rest of the League. Russell, in some 140 head-to-heads Vs Wilt NEVER stopped, or even slowed him - Wilt was WAY better than Russell.

West, "O" and Baylor, imo, were all clearly not as great as Wilt and all clearly better than Russell. (btw, vis-ŕ-vis compared to Russell, only in regards Baylor, do bagwell and I differ).
Im starting to come around on Russel. I still have him above Elgin thats for sure.

Pablonovi
05-26-2014, 02:02 PM
Why thank you sir. Glad to know that some people appreciate my posting/opinions around here. I personally think that Red is the third greatest coach of all time under Phil and Pop. Good to know you a fellow fan of the Purple and Gold. Just means that you know what good basketball truly is. :)

Hey amos1er,
1) You're most welcome, kind sir.

2) I have usually appreciated your posting/opinions (with the exception of your very strong opinion about a couple of NBA players - no need to mention who here - way too off-topic; besides,I AM complimenting you here).

3) I agree. I have Red 3rd, after Phil & Pop. (I'm beginning to shift towards thinking Pop merits #1 (less w more)

4) Been a Purple & Gold rabid fan for 55+ years :oldguy: (I watched virtually every game that was on TV of West's & Baylor's careers; I thought you knew / had picked this up; no biggie);

5) When the Lakers are NOT involved; I root for all kinds of other: great players, great plays, great games.

6) I know I'm no expert; but I do like to think of myself as a decent "connoisseur" of pro B-Ball.

P.S. Your excellent "dissection" of Russell's one-sided game VS Magic's much more complete game MOVED me. I grew up in New Jersey; went to High School for 4 years just outside Boston. I went to games at the Gaaaaden. I saw Russ play in person; and many of his games on TV. So, your opinion on him, rare until recently, completely jibes with mine.

Bruno
05-26-2014, 02:26 PM
Russell's offense is not a good comparison to Magic's defense.
yeah it is. both of them were weak on one side of the ball. they are examples of players who dominated one side of the ball. thats the general point i'm making, you can argue specifics (which you do and I disagree with) but the general point remains the same.


Russell was nothing short of a liability on offense while Magic, even though not a great defender was still a good defender. Russell was absolutely abysmal on offense for a big man shooting around 45% from the field.

Russell averaged 21 points and 5 assists per game for three consecutive post seasons from 1961 through 1963 while the Celtics racked three straight championships. there's nothing "absolutely abysmal" about that. obviously he wasn't elite offensively but you're suggesting that he's absolutely abysmal while saying that MAGIC was still a "good defender" despite not making a single defensive team ever.


If he was still playing, he would be only good for put backs and tip ins. He was a D- caliber offensive player. Magic was never an elite defender, but he was far from a liability on that end.
Offensive liabilites don't average 21/5 during a three season championship post-season arch.


He was more than capable of guarding the other teams opposing players on any given night and he could truly guard all 5 positions. He was a B caliber defender. So it's not really a good comparison to say that Russell's deficiencies on the offensive end are comparable to Magic's on the defensive end. Just because Magic was not an elite defender and didn't make an all defensive team in his career, doesn't mean that he was as big a detriment as Russell was on the offensive end.
this is subjectively bias. Magic is a "B" defender, Russell a "D" caliber offensive player? you've supported no statistics to support either claim and is essentially pure commentary. you're gona have to explain how a D caliber offensive player was capable of averaging 21 points and 5 assists through three season championship run in the post-season.



Magic is the force that drove the Lakers, while Russell was very fortunate to be gifted the best teams in the league for a span of 15 years... His whole career essentially.
Russel wasn't the force that drove the Celtics? look at what you're saying here man, major Laker bias shining through here.


Magic had great teams too, but none with the disparity in talent that Russell had over the league during his reign. Russell could be replaced by a plethora of big men and the Celts would have still been nearly as successful. Though I will say it's debatable if they could have gotten all 11 in 15 years. Still, Magic was the driving force behind the Lakers showtime dominance in the 1980's. There are few players who could have ran that system to that perfection and have gotten as good results. In fact, I would say that there are none other than him. He extended Kareem's career and made all the others around him better. I don't really see anyone that could have had his degree of success with that cast in that era other than him. It was truly amazing.

Russell made his teammates better as well.


Magic is surely a 2-5 top player of all-time for sure.
that seems to be the popular narrative we all grew up with. top five players of all time dominate both sides of the ball. its 50% of the game.

Pablonovi
05-26-2014, 03:19 PM
yeah it is. both of them were weak on one side of the ball. they are examples of players who dominated one side of the ball. thats the general point i'm making, you can argue specifics (which you do and I disagree with) but the general point remains the same.



Russell averaged 21 points and 5 assists per game for three consecutive post seasons from 1961 through 1963 while the Celtics racked three straight championships. there's nothing "absolutely abysmal" about that. obviously he wasn't elite offensively but you're suggesting that he's absolutely abysmal while saying that MAGIC was still a "good defender" despite not making a single defensive team ever.


Offensive liabilites don't average 21/5 during a three season championship post-season arch.


this is subjectively bias. Magic is a "B" defender, Russell a "D" caliber offensive player? you've supported no statistics to support either claim and is essentially pure commentary. you're gona have to explain how a D caliber offensive player was capable of averaging 21 points and 5 assists through three season championship run in the post-season.



Russel wasn't the force that drove the Celtics? look at what you're saying here man, major Laker bias shining through here.



Russell made his teammates better as well.


that seems to be the popular narrative we all grew up with. top five players of all time dominate both sides of the ball. its 50% of the game.

Hey Bruno,
Where do you have them both ranked? (Just asking)

Pablonovi
05-26-2014, 03:26 PM
Pretty much it's a "Given" that "Defense Is Half The Game" in the NBA.

But is this really true? Is that how coaches & GMs treat it?

I don't really think so.

That's why I posit in my Title the questions of would it make (much of) a difference if the scores were, on average, a good deal higher or lower.

For example, wouldn't it be true that if the average game's final score was 75-70 or even 55-50; wouldn't that indicate that in such an era, Defense was more important than it is now?

If the average score was 125-120 or 150-145; wouldn't that, conversely, indicate that, in that kind of era, Defense was less important than it is now?

I think Offense has always been more important than Defense in the NBA. An average score of 100+ is the result of Offense dominating and Defense moderating that Offensive domination.

So, In My Opinion, Offense Is More Than Half Of The NBA Game (has been for decades; probably will remain so).

In Soccer, the average score is probably about 2.5-1 (Now that's Defensive Dominance, if you ask me).

Lakers + Giants
05-26-2014, 03:54 PM
Payton
Drexler
Durant
Garnett
Mourning

They'd be amazing defensively, and its not like they would struggle to score.

amos1er
05-26-2014, 07:49 PM
Hey amos1er,
1) You're most welcome, kind sir.

2) I have usually appreciated your posting/opinions (with the exception of your very strong opinion about a couple of NBA players - no need to mention who here - way too off-topic; besides,I AM complimenting you here).

3) I agree. I have Red 3rd, after Phil & Pop. (I'm beginning to shift towards thinking Pop merits #1 (less w more)

4) Been a Purple & Gold rabid fan for 55+ years :oldguy: (I watched virtually every game that was on TV of West's & Baylor's careers; I thought you knew / had picked this up; no biggie);

5) When the Lakers are NOT involved; I root for all kinds of other: great players, great plays, great games.

6) I know I'm no expert; but I do like to think of myself as a decent "connoisseur" of pro B-Ball.

P.S. Your excellent "dissection" of Russell's one-sided game VS Magic's much more complete game MOVED me. I grew up in New Jersey; went to High School for 4 years just outside Boston. I went to games at the Gaaaaden. I saw Russ play in person; and many of his games on TV. So, your opinion on him, rare until recently, completely jibes with mine.

Most people on PSD are starting to come around to the idea that Russell is not on the higher end of the top ten of all time, rather he is more like 9 or 10. Some might even have him in the 10-15 range. Though I give him top ten credit due to the fact that he was the team vocal leader and he did manage to get 11/15 rings even though his supporting cast was light years ahead of the competition around him.

Dade County
05-26-2014, 08:27 PM
Lbj (as my pg...if thats cheating)... Cp3
Ray Allen
KD
Dirk
Alonzo

amos1er
05-26-2014, 08:47 PM
yeah it is. both of them were weak on one side of the ball. they are examples of players who dominated one side of the ball. thats the general point i'm making, you can argue specifics (which you do and I disagree with) but the general point remains the same.

Regardless, Magic was far more valuable to his teams success and was much more on an integral part of their success that Russell was. Replace Russell with a plethora of all time great big men from the 1-20 range and they could have had similar to greater success with longevity being the biggest factor. Replace Magic with all time great point guards from the 1-20 range and no way do they even get close to the greatness of the showtime era. Magic's offense was a far more important ingredient to the Lakers success than was Russell's defense to the Celtics success. Furthermore, Magic was not as weak of a defender as Russell was an offensive player. Magics defense was not bottom tier compared to his all time great contemporaries. Russell's offense was. Russell was perhaps the weakest offensive big man in the history of the game... When comparing him to the greats of course. If we are only ranking offensive ability, Russell doesn't even make the top 100 of all time. Magic on the other hand, was not one of the weakest guards defensively. He would rank somewhere towards the top end of the middle. In addition, he could guard all position 1-5. Something should be said about that alone.


Russell averaged 21 points and 5 assists per game for three consecutive post seasons from 1961 through 1963 while the Celtics racked three straight championships. there's nothing "absolutely abysmal" about that. obviously he wasn't elite offensively but you're suggesting that he's absolutely abysmal while saying that MAGIC was still a "good defender" despite not making a single defensive team ever.

Again, abysmal when compared to the top ranked big men who have played this game at the pro level throughout the years... All things being relative of course. Much of his higher scoring ppg years came due to the fact that the league was much much weaker during the span you just mentioned. Also, his all star cast had a lot to do with getting easier scoring opportunities. Lets be honest here, even Dwight Howard could have done better offensively in that situation during that 3 year stretch and many feel that he is abysmal offensively for a big man.


Offensive liabilites don't average 21/5 during a three season championship post-season arch.

Again, this is in comparison to the great big men who played in the NBA. Even Tyson Chandler could have put up those numbers or better with that team during that three year stretch.


this is subjectively bias. Magic is a "B" defender, Russell a "D" caliber offensive player? you've supported no statistics to support either claim and is essentially pure commentary. you're gona have to explain how a D caliber offensive player was capable of averaging 21 points and 5 assists through three season championship run in the post-season.

Yes they were subjective. I never denied that. I would wager that if you conducted a poll, most would agree with my subjective assessment over yours. After all, eye test is a very important aspect in judging greatness. Especially when it is the general consensus.


Russel wasn't the force that drove the Celtics? look at what you're saying here man, major Laker bias shining through here.

I never said that he wasn't. Now your just putting words into my mouth. All I said was that Magic was more of a driving force. Russell was the vocal leader as well as the best defensive player. All I'm saying is that Magic was far more valuable to his team than Russell was to his and that Magic was more irreplaceable while Russell could have been replace with a variety of big men.


Russell made his teammates better as well.

That was never in question.


that seems to be the popular narrative we all grew up with. top five players of all time dominate both sides of the ball. its 50% of the game.

Yep, it is 50% of the game, which is why I don't have Russell in my top five. That and his overall impact could have been replicated by a number of players while Magic's couldn't.

Pablonovi
05-27-2014, 01:17 PM
Most people on PSD are starting to come around to the idea that Russell is not on the higher end of the top ten of all time, rather he is more like 9 or 10. Some might even have him in the 10-15 range. Though I give him top ten credit due to the fact that he was the team vocal leader and he did manage to get 11/15 rings even though his supporting cast was light years ahead of the competition around him.

Hey amos1er,
I've got Russell just outside NBA All-Time GOAT 15; in the 16-20 range.
(I have him #5 in his own era; behind: Wilt, West = "O-", & Baylor in this order).

btw, you've been mentioning 15 years. Russ only PLAYED 13 years.
LINK:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Russell

Russell according to Wikipedia:
"On the hardwood, he was considered the consummate defensive center, noted for his unmatched defensive intensity, his stellar basketball IQ and his sheer will to win.[21] Russell excelled at playing man-to-man defense, blocking shots, and grabbing defensive and offensive rebounds.[1] He also could score with putbacks and made mid-air outlet passes to point guard Bob Cousy for easy fast break points.[1] He also was known as a fine passer and pick-setter, featured a decent left-handed hook shot and finished strong on alley oops.[21] However, on offense, Russell's output was limited. His NBA career personal averages show him to be an average scorer (15.1 points career average), a poor free throw shooter (56.1%), and average overall shooter from the field (44%, not exceptional for a center). In his 13 years, he averaged a relatively low 13.4 field goals attempted (normally, top scorers average 20 and more), illustrating that he was never the focal point of the Celtics offense, instead focusing on his tremendous defense.[25]"

Magic according to Wikipedia:
"Johnson was honored as one of the 50 Greatest Players in NBA History in 1996, and enshrined in the Basketball Hall of Fame in 2002 for his individual career, and again in 2010 as a member of the "Dream Team".[5] He was rated the greatest NBA point guard of all time by ESPN in 2007.[6] His friendship and rivalry with Boston Celtics star Larry Bird, whom he faced in the 1979 NCAA finals and three NBA championship series, are well documented.
...
Johnson introduced a fast-paced style of basketball called "Showtime", described as a mix of "no-look passes off the fastbreak, pin-point alley-oops from halfcourt, spinning feeds and overhand bullets under the basket through triple teams."[5] ... Johnson was exceptional because he played point guard despite being 6 ft 9 in (2.06 m), a size reserved normally for frontcourt players.[5] He combined the size of a power forward, the one-on-one skills of a swingman, and the ball handling talent of a guard, making him one of the most dangerous triple-double threats of all time; his 138 triple-double games are second only to Oscar Robertson's 181.[162]"

FINALS & CHAMPIONSHIPS:
Russell: 12 Finals, 11 Championships;
Magic: 9 Finals; 5 Championships.

LINK: Russell: http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/r/russebi01.html
If you go about half way down the page, there's two charts showing his Regular Season and Play-Off Records.

Notice, if you will, that he played in 165 games in 13 years of Play Offs. Subtract the two years the C's didn't win (2 years, 9 games each) and you have this number of games to win their 11 Chips:

147 games / 11 Chips OR 13.36 games per Chip. Nowadays it takes 16 WINS to get a Chip; I'd guess the average series is won between 4-1 and 4-2, so that'd, ROUGH ESTIMATE mean 22 games total to win the average Chip. So that's about 2/3rds more games needed now than than; i.e. a lot more chances to get beaten; and MORE SERIES means more chances to get beaten or at least worn down before the next series.

All this just to point out that winning Chips is much tougher now than it was then. (Even without taking into account the Russell's Celtics DID have a higher percentage of the entire League's All-Stars than any other team since then; AND the most era dominant Coach+GM in Red.)

In Play-Offs (Advanced) Stats Win Shares:
Russell: 9th (in 13 Play Off Runs);
Magic is 5th (in 13 Play Off Runs)

In Play-Offs (Advanced) Stats Win Shares / 48 min:
Russell: 24th;
Magic: 4th

Comparing STRENGTH VS STRENTH: Russ's DEFENSE VS Magic's OFFENSE:
In Play-Offs (Advanced) Stats Win Shares:
Russell: 1ST in DEFENSIVE W.S.
Magic is 2ND* in OFFENSIVE W.S.

Comparing WEAKNESS VS WEAKNESS: Russ's OFFENSE VS Magic's DEFENSE:
In Play-Offs (Advanced) Stats Win Shares:
Russell: 78th in OFFENSIVE Win Shares
Magic: 17th in DEFENSIVE Win Shares

In Play-Offs (Advanced) Stats: PER:
Russell: 60th
Magic: 18th.

REGULAR SEASON RELATIVE "DOMINANCE":
CAREER WIN SHARES /48 min ALL-TIME RANK:
Russell: 24th;
Magic 8th

CAREER TOTAL WIN SHARES, ALL-TIME RANK:
Russell: 19th,
Magic: 23rd

Comparing STRENGTH VS STRENTH: Russ's DEFENSE VS Magic's OFFENSE:
Russell: 1st;
Magic: 20th

Comparing WEAKNESS VS WEAKNESS: Russ's OFFENSE VS Magic's DEFENSE:
Russell: <250th;
Magic: 61st

Best Season Win Shares / 48 min:
Magic had 4 YEARS (87,89,90,91) BETTER THAN RUSSELL'S BEST YEAR (64) ! and
Magic had 7 YEARS better than Russell's 3rd Best Year.

Russell: 1963-64: All-Time Rank: 148
Magic: 1989-90: All-Time Rank: 36; PLUS: other years: #44, #53, #83

Regular Season Career PER Rank:
Russell: 101st
Magic: 14th

Regular Season Games Played:
Russell: 963; Magic 906.
(N.B. Both played (much) less than everybody else considered in the All-Time GOAT Top 20-25.)

Great Regular Seasons:
Russell: 11
Magic: 10

HOW GREAT COMPARATIVELY WERE THEIR GREAT SEASONS? ALL-NBA TEAMS
Russell: 3 All-NBA 1st-Teams; 8 All-NBA 2nd-Teams; (Russell was the #1 Center 3 times)
Magic: 9 All-NBA 1st-Teams; 1 All-NBA 2nd-Teams; (Magic was the #1 PG 9 times)

Wikipedia on each of their Greatest (Individual) Achievements:
Russell:
"In his career, Russell won five regular season MVP awards (1959, 1961–63, 1965)—tied with Michael Jordan for second all-time behind Kareem Abdul-Jabbar's six awards. He was selected three times to the All-NBA First Teams (1959, 1963, 1965) and eight Second Teams (1958, 1960–62, 1964, 1966–68), and was a twelve-time NBA All-Star (1958–1969). "

Magic:
"Johnson's career achievements include three NBA MVP Awards, nine NBA Finals appearances, twelve All-Star games, and ten All-NBA First and Second Team nominations."

*Magic should soon drop to 3rd because LeBron will pass him this year (if the HEAT make the Finals; possibly even in the Eastern Conf. Finals; if it goes more than one more game).

THIS POST'S 3 PRINCIPAL LINKS:
Russell: http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/r/russebi01.html
Magic: http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/johnsma02.html
NBA & ABA Leaders and Records: http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/
n.b. imo, This last linked page is THE single most useful (starting) internet page for comparing careers; particularly of the All-Time NBA-ABA Greats

Bruno
05-27-2014, 01:28 PM
Regardless, Magic was far more valuable to his teams success and was much more on an integral part of their success that Russell was.
this is your opinion supported by zero facts. support your opinion with some facts and lets have a real debate amoster.


Replace Russell with a plethora of all time great big men from the 1-20 range and they could have had similar to greater success with longevity being the biggest factor.Replace Magic with all time great point guards from the 1-20 range and no way do they even get close to the greatness of the showtime era.
thats because the greatest centers are more plentiful and better than the greatest PG's, that doesn't have anything to do with what were actually talking about here. there is zero correlation to our discussion here, do you see that?


Magic's offense was a far more important ingredient to the Lakers success than was Russell's defense to the Celtics success. ...prove it.


Furthermore, Magic was not as weak of a defender as Russell was an offensive player.
zero defensive first teams for Magic, 21/5 for Russell during a three championship run. there, I've provided some numbers and facts. where are yours?


Magics defense was not bottom tier compared to his all time great contemporaries. Russell's offense was. yeah it was. name me another top ten player with zero defensive team appearances Amoster (you can't because there aren't any).


Russell was perhaps the weakest offensive big man in the history of the game... When comparing him to the greats of course.
we agree. that doesn't make him abysmal, and it doesn't make Magic any better on defense than he actually was. when you exaggerate so hard to make your point your point is lost in the exaggeration.


If we are only ranking offensive ability, Russell doesn't even make the top 100 of all time. Magic on the other hand, was not one of the weakest guards defensively. He would rank somewhere towards the top end of the middle. In addition, he could guard all position 1-5. Something should be said about that alone.
Magic isn't a top 100 defender ever so I don't know what you're trying to get at here.




Again, this is in comparison to the great big men who played in the NBA. Even Tyson Chandler could have put up those numbers or better with that team during that three year stretch.
:laugh2: thats ridiculous. you're exaggerating to an extreme to help you're point, but you're not actually helping you're point.



Yes they were subjective. I never denied that. I would wager that if you conducted a poll, most would agree with my subjective assessment over yours. After all, eye test is a very important aspect in judging greatness. Especially when it is the general consensus.
so what you're saying is that general NBA fans are uninformed?



I never said that he wasn't. Now your just putting words into my mouth. All I said was that Magic was more of a driving force. Russell was the vocal leader as well as the best defensive player. All I'm saying is that Magic was far more valuable to his team than Russell was to his and that Magic was more irreplaceable while Russell could have been replace with a variety of big men.
Right, and i'm saying its a groundless opinion. it's also irrelevant in regard to our discussion. it's just an unrelated, inaccurate side point that you decided to throw in thinking it helps your argument. it doesn't.



Yep, it is 50% of the game, which is why I don't have Russell in my top five. That and his overall impact could have been replicated by a number of players while Magic's couldn't.Do you understand why that's irrelevant?

Bruno
05-27-2014, 01:35 PM
Hey Bruno,
Where do you have them both ranked? (Just asking)
Not exactly sure but both are 100% not in my top five. they're both some where from 6-10 if I had to give it a number. i'll pretty much take all the GOAT big men in front of the two along with MJ. they're in the same tier with Kobe and Bird after the elite big men/MJ.


Pretty much it's a "Given" that "Defense Is Half The Game" in the NBA.

But is this really true? Is that how coaches & GMs treat it?

I don't really think so.

That's why I posit in my Title the questions of would it make (much of) a difference if the scores were, on average, a good deal higher or lower.

For example, wouldn't it be true that if the average game's final score was 75-70 or even 55-50; wouldn't that indicate that in such an era, Defense was more important than it is now?

If the average score was 125-120 or 150-145; wouldn't that, conversely, indicate that, in that kind of era, Defense was less important than it is now?

I think Offense has always been more important than Defense in the NBA. An average score of 100+ is the result of Offense dominating and Defense moderating that Offensive domination.

So, In My Opinion, Offense Is More Than Half Of The NBA Game (has been for decades; probably will remain so).

In Soccer, the average score is probably about 2.5-1 (Now that's Defensive Dominance, if you ask me).

I gotta say Poblonovi, you're trying to reason yourself out from under the obvious here. NBA champions are almost always top ten league wide in defensive rating. total points is more so a reflection on the pace of the game and how the officials choose to officiate the game, it isn't really a reflection on whether or not defense is an integral part of the game. if a game is inherently built to allow lots of scoring, it doesn't mean defense in that sport is any less important than in soccer or hockey.

Pablonovi
05-27-2014, 04:02 PM
Not exactly sure but both are 100% not in my top five. they're both some where from 6-10 if I had to give it a number. i'll pretty much take all the GOAT big men in front of the two along with MJ. they're in the same tier with Kobe and Bird after the elite big men/MJ.



I gotta say Poblonovi, you're trying to reason yourself out from under the obvious here. NBA champions are almost always top ten league wide in defensive rating. total points is more so a reflection on the pace of the game and how the officials choose to officiate the game, it isn't really a reflection on whether or not defense is an integral part of the game. if a game is inherently built to allow lots of scoring, it doesn't mean defense in that sport is any less important than in soccer or hockey.

Hey Bruno,
Your insistence on arguing both logically and on the basis of facts always impresses me.

Specifically, whatever differences we two have about where to rank Russell, the gap is not that great. In fact, not worth blinding us to the fact that "we agree far more than we disagree" (on this matter and elsewhere through-out PSD, in my opinion).

About how big a role defense plays in the NBA. Have you ever even seen the question I raised, brought up before? I haven't. It's kind of like it's one of the such-well-know-facts; that people never question it.

Would you agree that the relative influence of defense in the NBA is NOT always the same? Isn't it also the case, that if game scores are like: 125-120 as opposed to 75-70; that while there's still both offense and defense in both cases; in the high-scoring case, Offense is more influential than in the low-scoring case.

Before the 24-second clock era, scores were even lower; and, in my opinion, defenses dominated offenses like never since. In the era of the Denver Nuggets averaging, iirc, 120 ppg, they won a good percent of their games; with, imo, their emphasis on offense clearly dominating their emphasis on defense.

I DO believe that, by their very nature, some sports are much more dominated by offense (like basketball) while others are much more dominated by defense (like Soccer & Hockey).

I could IMAGINE (ain't gonna happen probably) the FIFA deciding to "offensize" Soccer. Scores instead of 2-0; might be 6 or higher vs 3. That would be decidedly less defensively-dominated that what we have now, wouldn't it in your opinion?

Right now, despite my claim that it is a sport thoroughly dominated by defense, are almost all Offensive players (even though they average less than a goal a game - not much Offense).

amos1er
05-27-2014, 04:27 PM
this is your opinion supported by zero facts. support your opinion with some facts and lets have a real debate amoster.

You opening statement was pure opinion... Why should I counter with anything other than that?


thats because the greatest centers are more plentiful and better than the greatest PG's, that doesn't have anything to do with what were actually talking about here. there is zero correlation to our discussion here, do you see that?

...prove it.

I suppose you can play that card, but the root of this debate is entrenched in overall all-time great rankings, so I felt the need to elaborate further in order to clarify my POV. If you want to keep the debate simple and just compare Magic's defensive shortcomings to Russell's offensive shortcomings, thats fine by me and even easier to prove.


zero defensive first teams for Magic, 21/5 for Russell during a three championship run. there, I've provided some numbers and facts. where are yours?

Your 21/5 are subjected to the era that he played in. If you want to submit those numbers as your only evidence, I must ask you a question then... Do you think that Russell could have put up those kind of numbers on a championship team in any year greater than 1970?

You use the argument that the center position is deeper than the point guard position in order to justify the fact that multiple big men could have replicated what Russell had done offensively for the Celtics while barely, if any, pg's could have replicated what Magic did for the Lakers. If you want to use this, then I can bring up the fact that Magic was up against a far greater field of candidates defensively at the guard position defensively than Russell was at the Center position offensively. Magic was up against great defensive guards such as Dennis Johnson, Sidney Moncrief, Maurice Cheeks, Michael Cooper, Michael Jordan, and Alvin Robertson. Surely you have to admit that the field Magic was up against defensively was clearly more competitive that what Russell was up against offensively.

You must also factor in the fact that Magic is naturally built to play PF. Naturally he is at a disadvantage when it comes to guarding the guard position which is why his assignments were always screwed up. Rarely did he get the opportunity to guard opposing players who he truly best matched up with. Have to factor in that not only could Magic play all five positions offensively, he could defensively as well. AC Green and Worthy were usually guarding the opponents that Magic was best suited to guard. Not his fault he was playing out of position defensively most of the time.

Lets not also neglect to bring up these key numbers that Pablonovi was so kind to bring to my attention:


Comparing WEAKNESS VS WEAKNESS: Russ's OFFENSE VS Magic's DEFENSE:
In Play-Offs (Advanced) Stats Win Shares:
Russell: 78th in OFFENSIVE Win Shares
Magic: 17th in DEFENSIVE Win Shares


Comparing WEAKNESS VS WEAKNESS: Russ's OFFENSE VS Magic's DEFENSE:
Russell: <250th;
Magic: 61st

Not that these numbers are the end all be all, but they certainly do add credence to my point that Russell was a far greater liability on offense than Magic was on defense. Which was the original debate we were having. Just because Magic wasn't an elite defender and didn't make any first or second defensive teams adds nothing to your point. Not only was Magic's competition greater at great defensive guards, the original point was not that Magic was an elite defender or not... Rather it was that his defensive deficiencies weren't nearly as great as Russell's offensive deficiencies. Again, Magic was an above average defender while Russell was a bottom tier offensive player.



yeah it was. name me another top ten player with zero defensive team appearances Amoster (you can't because there aren't any).

Irrelevant to the argument at hand. Not making an all-defensive team doesn't mean that you are necessarily a liability... It just means that you weren't considered elite in comparison to your contemporaries.


we agree. that doesn't make him abysmal, and it doesn't make Magic any better on defense than he actually was. when you exaggerate so hard to make your point your point is lost in the exaggeration.

Exaggerations don't make what I am saying any less true.


Magic isn't a top 100 defender ever so I don't know what you're trying to get at here.

Proof?


:laugh2: thats ridiculous. you're exaggerating to an extreme to help you're point, but you're not actually helping you're point.

How so? Tyson Chandler was the defensive anchor to a championship team the same as Russell was. If we put Tyson back in a time machine and subbed him with Russell, I'm willing to bet that he could have gotten quite a few chips with the Celtics and perhaps even put up similar offensive numbers to the three years you sited. He wouldn't win as many as Russell did because he is not as good a defender, vocal leader, and locker room presence, but with that cast coupled with his hight and ability, it is not an exaggeration to say that he couldn't put up those kind of numbers offensively in a far far weaker era. Especially for a legit 7 footer which there were really none of at the time. I don't really see anything wrong with what I said. I would think that many of the respected posters on here would agree that Chandler could put up 22 and 5 in the early 60's and on a higher fg% at that.


so what you're saying is that general NBA fans are uninformed?

Sounds like your putting words in my mouth again.


Right, and i'm saying its a groundless opinion. it's also irrelevant in regard to our discussion. it's just an unrelated, inaccurate side point that you decided to throw in thinking it helps your argument. it doesn't.

One of the original statements you made when you were responding to Pablonovi was in regards to all-time rankings. Overall impact has a lot to do with that and I was pointing out that Magic's overall impact was far greater as well as the liabilities he brought to the table... Or lack there of.


Do you understand why that's irrelevant?

I do.

amos1er
05-27-2014, 04:43 PM
Hey amos1er,
I've got Russell just outside NBA All-Time GOAT 15; in the 16-20 range.
(I have him #5 in his own era; behind: Wilt, West = "O-", & Baylor in this order).

btw, you've been mentioning 15 years. Russ only PLAYED 13 years.
LINK:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Russell

Russell according to Wikipedia:
"On the hardwood, he was considered the consummate defensive center, noted for his unmatched defensive intensity, his stellar basketball IQ and his sheer will to win.[21] Russell excelled at playing man-to-man defense, blocking shots, and grabbing defensive and offensive rebounds.[1] He also could score with putbacks and made mid-air outlet passes to point guard Bob Cousy for easy fast break points.[1] He also was known as a fine passer and pick-setter, featured a decent left-handed hook shot and finished strong on alley oops.[21] However, on offense, Russell's output was limited. His NBA career personal averages show him to be an average scorer (15.1 points career average), a poor free throw shooter (56.1%), and average overall shooter from the field (44%, not exceptional for a center). In his 13 years, he averaged a relatively low 13.4 field goals attempted (normally, top scorers average 20 and more), illustrating that he was never the focal point of the Celtics offense, instead focusing on his tremendous defense.[25]"

Magic according to Wikipedia:
"Johnson was honored as one of the 50 Greatest Players in NBA History in 1996, and enshrined in the Basketball Hall of Fame in 2002 for his individual career, and again in 2010 as a member of the "Dream Team".[5] He was rated the greatest NBA point guard of all time by ESPN in 2007.[6] His friendship and rivalry with Boston Celtics star Larry Bird, whom he faced in the 1979 NCAA finals and three NBA championship series, are well documented.
...
Johnson introduced a fast-paced style of basketball called "Showtime", described as a mix of "no-look passes off the fastbreak, pin-point alley-oops from halfcourt, spinning feeds and overhand bullets under the basket through triple teams."[5] ... Johnson was exceptional because he played point guard despite being 6 ft 9 in (2.06 m), a size reserved normally for frontcourt players.[5] He combined the size of a power forward, the one-on-one skills of a swingman, and the ball handling talent of a guard, making him one of the most dangerous triple-double threats of all time; his 138 triple-double games are second only to Oscar Robertson's 181.[162]"

FINALS & CHAMPIONSHIPS:
Russell: 12 Finals, 11 Championships;
Magic: 9 Finals; 5 Championships.

LINK: Russell: http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/r/russebi01.html
If you go about half way down the page, there's two charts showing his Regular Season and Play-Off Records.

Notice, if you will, that he played in 165 games in 13 years of Play Offs. Subtract the two years the C's didn't win (2 years, 9 games each) and you have this number of games to win their 11 Chips:

147 games / 11 Chips OR 13.36 games per Chip. Nowadays it takes 16 WINS to get a Chip; I'd guess the average series is won between 4-1 and 4-2, so that'd, ROUGH ESTIMATE mean 22 games total to win the average Chip. So that's about 2/3rds more games needed now than than; i.e. a lot more chances to get beaten; and MORE SERIES means more chances to get beaten or at least worn down before the next series.

All this just to point out that winning Chips is much tougher now than it was then. (Even without taking into account the Russell's Celtics DID have a higher percentage of the entire League's All-Stars than any other team since then; AND the most era dominant Coach+GM in Red.)

In Play-Offs (Advanced) Stats Win Shares:
Russell: 9th (in 13 Play Off Runs);
Magic is 5th (in 13 Play Off Runs)

In Play-Offs (Advanced) Stats Win Shares / 48 min:
Russell: 24th;
Magic: 4th

Comparing STRENGTH VS STRENTH: Russ's DEFENSE VS Magic's OFFENSE:
In Play-Offs (Advanced) Stats Win Shares:
Russell: 1ST in DEFENSIVE W.S.
Magic is 2ND* in OFFENSIVE W.S.

Comparing WEAKNESS VS WEAKNESS: Russ's OFFENSE VS Magic's DEFENSE:
In Play-Offs (Advanced) Stats Win Shares:
Russell: 78th in OFFENSIVE Win Shares
Magic: 17th in DEFENSIVE Win Shares

In Play-Offs (Advanced) Stats: PER:
Russell: 60th
Magic: 18th.

REGULAR SEASON RELATIVE "DOMINANCE":
CAREER WIN SHARES /48 min ALL-TIME RANK:
Russell: 24th;
Magic 8th

CAREER TOTAL WIN SHARES, ALL-TIME RANK:
Russell: 19th,
Magic: 23rd

Comparing STRENGTH VS STRENTH: Russ's DEFENSE VS Magic's OFFENSE:
Russell: 1st;
Magic: 20th

Comparing WEAKNESS VS WEAKNESS: Russ's OFFENSE VS Magic's DEFENSE:
Russell: <250th;
Magic: 61st

Best Season Win Shares / 48 min:
Magic had 4 YEARS (87,89,90,91) BETTER THAN RUSSELL'S BEST YEAR (64) ! and
Magic had 7 YEARS better than Russell's 3rd Best Year.

Russell: 1963-64: All-Time Rank: 148
Magic: 1989-90: All-Time Rank: 36; PLUS: other years: #44, #53, #83

Regular Season Career PER Rank:
Russell: 101st
Magic: 14th

Regular Season Games Played:
Russell: 963; Magic 906.
(N.B. Both played (much) less than everybody else considered in the All-Time GOAT Top 20-25.)

Great Regular Seasons:
Russell: 11
Magic: 10

HOW GREAT COMPARATIVELY WERE THEIR GREAT SEASONS? ALL-NBA TEAMS
Russell: 3 All-NBA 1st-Teams; 8 All-NBA 2nd-Teams; (Russell was the #1 Center 3 times)
Magic: 9 All-NBA 1st-Teams; 1 All-NBA 2nd-Teams; (Magic was the #1 PG 9 times)

Wikipedia on each of their Greatest (Individual) Achievements:
Russell:
"In his career, Russell won five regular season MVP awards (1959, 1961–63, 1965)—tied with Michael Jordan for second all-time behind Kareem Abdul-Jabbar's six awards. He was selected three times to the All-NBA First Teams (1959, 1963, 1965) and eight Second Teams (1958, 1960–62, 1964, 1966–68), and was a twelve-time NBA All-Star (1958–1969). "

Magic:
"Johnson's career achievements include three NBA MVP Awards, nine NBA Finals appearances, twelve All-Star games, and ten All-NBA First and Second Team nominations."

*Magic should soon drop to 3rd because LeBron will pass him this year (if the HEAT make the Finals; possibly even in the Eastern Conf. Finals; if it goes more than one more game).

THIS POST'S 3 PRINCIPAL LINKS:
Russell: http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/r/russebi01.html
Magic: http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/johnsma02.html
NBA & ABA Leaders and Records: http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/
n.b. imo, This last linked page is THE single most useful (starting) internet page for comparing careers; particularly of the All-Time NBA-ABA Greats

Very nice post. I can understand why you have Russell in the 16-20 range. He wasn't as good a player as West, Baylor, Wilt, or Big O for sure, but since winning is such an important part of the game, I do give him a ton of credit for his 11 rings in 13 seasons (thanks for the correction). He was horrible offensively and very lucky to be gifted such a great team, but he was the vocal and locker room leader of that team and that is a lot to be said. The overall contributions he made defensively were the greatest amongst any of his teammates individually and that is saying a lot for a team that has won more than any other in NBA history... Granted it was a different era. So yes he was not talented at all offensively to say the least, but when he judge for overall impact, technically his was the greatest in comparison to any of his teammates and his team did win the most. That is why I rank him above guys like West, Baylor, and Big O even though he cannot come close to touching them in terms of offensive talent. His overall impact to his particular team was arguably just as great as theirs even though he was not the driving force behind his team the way that they were. That and he won a lot more.

BTW, where do you rank Magic on the all-time list?

Pablonovi
05-27-2014, 05:31 PM
Very nice post. I can understand why you have Russell in the 16-20 range. He wasn't as good a player as West, Baylor, Wilt, or Big O for sure, but since winning is such an important part of the game, I do give him a ton of credit for his 11 rings in 13 seasons (thanks for the correction). He was horrible offensively and very lucky to be gifted such a great team, but he was the vocal and locker room leader of that team and that is a lot to be said. The overall contributions he made defensively were the greatest amongst any of his teammates individually and that is saying a lot for a team that has won more than any other in NBA history... Granted it was a different era. So yes he was not talented at all offensively to say the least, but when he judge for overall impact, technically his was the greatest in comparison to any of his teammates and his team did win the most. That is why I rank him above guys like West, Baylor, and Big O even though he cannot come close to touching them in terms of offensive talent. His overall impact to his particular team was arguably just as great as theirs even though he was not the driving force behind his team the way that they were. That and he won a lot more.

BTW, where do you rank Magic on the all-time list?

Hey amos1er,
I've got the All-Time NBA GOAT Top 4:
1 KAJ (50% more Great Years than anybody else in the Top 5; 4 More Finals Than MJ; Greatest Ever Shot)

2 Magic (Greatest TEAM-mate ever -this counts hugely in my book in a team sport; 3 more Finals than MJ)

3 MJ ("only" 11 Great Years; "worst" teammate in my top 10; losing 1.5 yrs for gambling = his very BAD)

4 Wilt (most era-dominant NBA player ever, by far (I don't count Mikan)) If he/they could have one a game 7 or two more, I'd have him higher, the more game 7s won, the higher up this list. He just couldn't individually force his teams past the Celtic All-Star teams - not his fault at all).

P.S. What a pleasure "comparing notes" with you; I really like most of your thinking on these matters quite a bit.

mightybosstone
05-27-2014, 07:02 PM
PG Chris Paul
SG Joe Dumars
SF Kevin Durant
PF Dirk Nowitzki
C Dikembe Mutombo

This roster has no holes. Paul is arguably better than all but two of the PGs on the "cheat code" list and he has literally no holes in his game. Everyone went the Allen/Pippen route with the wings, but Pippen was a pretty mediocre outside shooter. By going Dumars/Durant, I get the best peak player of that group (Durant), superior outside shooting and I still get to have an all-time great perimeter defender who was a No. 2 for multiple championship teams.

As for the front court, I'd like to have kept Garnett, but Dirk's offensive prowess and clutch postseason play were too good to pass up. He'd be an unstoppable force against PFs of almost any area and by placing him between Durant and Mutombo, I'm not going to suffer at all in the rebounding department. This team could beat any roster anybody could throw at it using other players.

amos1er
05-27-2014, 07:05 PM
Hey amos1er,
I've got the All-Time NBA GOAT Top 4:
1 KAJ (50% more Great Years than anybody else in the Top 5; 4 More Finals Than MJ; Greatest Ever Shot)

2 Magic (Greatest TEAM-mate ever -this counts hugely in my book in a team sport; 3 more Finals than MJ)

3 MJ ("only" 11 Great Years; "worst" teammate in my top 10; losing 1.5 yrs for gambling = his very BAD)

4 Wilt (most era-dominant NBA player ever, by far (I don't count Mikan)) If he/they could have one a game 7 or two more, I'd have him higher, the more game 7s won, the higher up this list. He just couldn't individually force his teams past the Celtic All-Star teams - not his fault at all).

P.S. What a pleasure "comparing notes" with you; I really like most of your thinking on these matters quite a bit.

Thank you. It's nice to compare notes with a poster that does not get offended so easily and can look at things objectively.

My top four is almost the same as yours, except I have MJ at number one. He didn't have the best longevity, but then again neither did Magic. About that game seven theory, MJ didn't need to go to game seven to win a series... Thats not his fault, in fact I think it is just a further testament to his overall greatness. The dude was the best late game performer of all time and his finals numbers are easily the best as are his playoff numbers. He is the only guy to win the scoring title, DPOY, MVP, and Finals MVP in the same season. Can't really argue with that. Oh and he never lost in the finals. His peak was also by far the greatest we have ever seen as well as his overall dominance. He knew when to make the right pass when need be as well... i.e Paxton, Kerr. His overall impact in terms of winning is rivaled and second to none. I just cannot see an argument for him not being the GOAT.

My top ten list...

1. Jordan
2. Magic
3. Kareem
4. Wilt
5. Shaq
6. Kobe
7. Bird
8. Duncan
9. Hakeem
10. Russell

amos1er
05-27-2014, 07:08 PM
PG Chris Paul
SG Joe Dumars
SF Kevin Durant
PF Dirk Nowitzki
C Dikembe Mutombo

This roster has no holes. Paul is arguably better than all but two of the PGs on the "cheat code" list and he has literally no holes in his game. Everyone went the Allen/Pippen route with the wings, but Pippen was a pretty mediocre outside shooter. By going Dumars/Durant, I get the best peak player of that group (Durant), superior outside shooting and I still get to have an all-time great perimeter defender who was a No. 2 for multiple championship teams.

As for the front court, I'd like to have kept Garnett, but Dirk's offensive prowess and clutch postseason play were too good to pass up. He'd be an unstoppable force against PFs of almost any area and by placing him between Durant and Mutombo, I'm not going to suffer at all in the rebounding department. This team could beat any roster anybody could throw at it using other players.

Nice team, the only thing I can think of is that there would not be enough ball to go around between Dirk, KD, and Paul... All high usage players. All three are pretty unselfish though, but perhaps too unselfish. If Durant was more of an alpha male I would agree with you 100%. Perhaps sub Dirk out with Malone.

mightybosstone
05-27-2014, 07:18 PM
Nice team, the only thing I can think of is that there would not be enough ball to go around between Dirk, KD, and Paul... All high usage players. All three are pretty unselfish though, but perhaps too unselfish. If Durant was more of an alpha male I would agree with you 100%. Perhaps sub Dirk out with Malone.

Ewww... No. First off, I hate Karl Malone with a passion and would never put him on any all-time great list for any reason unless it was absolutely necessary. Secondly, you mention that Paul, Durant and Dirk were all too high usage, except Malone took more shots and averaged a higher USG% throughout his career, so that wouldn't help with that at all. Malone also isn't going to space the floor out as far and I'd be replacing one of the greatest postseason performers of all time with one of the biggest postseason chokers of all time.

If I swap out Dirk, it would be for KG, not Malone.

KnIckFaN.2883
05-27-2014, 07:26 PM
Kevin Johnson
Chris mullin
Bernard King
Kevin McHale
Patrick ewing

KnIckFaN.2883
05-27-2014, 07:30 PM
My team would definitely could score

Pablonovi
05-27-2014, 07:50 PM
Thank you. It's nice to compare notes with a poster that does not get offended so easily and can look at things objectively.

My top four is almost the same as yours, except I have MJ at number one. He didn't have the best longevity, but then again neither did Magic. About that game seven theory, MJ didn't need to go to game seven to win a series... Thats not his fault, in fact I think it is just a further testament to his overall greatness. The dude was the best late game performer of all time and his finals numbers are easily the best as are his playoff numbers. He is the only guy to win the scoring title, DPOY, MVP, and Finals MVP in the same season. Can't really argue with that. Oh and he never lost in the finals. His peak was also by far the greatest we have ever seen as well as his overall dominance. He knew when to make the right pass when need be as well... i.e Paxton, Kerr. His overall impact in terms of winning is rivaled and second to none. I just cannot see an argument for him not being the GOAT.

My top ten list...

1. Jordan
2. Magic
3. Kareem
4. Wilt
5. Shaq
6. Kobe
7. Bird
8. Duncan
9. Hakeem
10. Russell

Hey amos1er,
This is an excellent top 10.
I always say, about "my top 4 (KAJ, Magic, MJ & Wilt) that I can live with anybody's list AS LONG AS they have these 4, in any order, within their top 5 - you obviously do. A strong argument can be made for any order amongst these four. (I've been getting on my own case a little, in my head I mean, for not yet having made a semi-complete case for why I have KAJ as my #1 - I think I'll get on that right after posting this. Please let me know what you think (as if you wouldn't - hehe))

I have both Celts lower than you. I have somebody you don't like much as the best SF ever.
I have: Kobe, Shaq, TD, & Hakeem almost exactly as you. I tend to list them in the order I've just given but rank them all: #5-9 because, pretty much everytime I think about it seriously, I tend to change their order.

I've got Dr. J. #10. I DO count the ABA (except it's first 2 years; when it was clearly inferior) as equal (at least as far as it's All-Stars) to the NBA at that time. imo, Dr. J's ABA years (viewed unfortunately by so few people) were perhaps the greatest Peak any pro B-Ball player ever had. I did get to see him a couple of times live and a few dozen on TV. He routinely made moves I've never seen anybody else even attempt. For example, on a number of his one-man full-court breaks, he'd dribble the ball forward between his legs without missing a beat - completely breaking the ankles of the defender(s). His offense was both unlimited and truly unstoppable. He was an absolute magician with the ball (those monster-sized hands didn't hurt either). And he played serious D.

Another thing. When Dr. J. came to the NBA he WAS still capable of doing all his greatest stuff. (He only lost some of his explosiveness years later). But his coach asked him to tone the individual stuff down for the good of the multi-star team he was now a part of. Dr. J. (who I have in my Top 5 All-Time TEAM-mates) dutifully, merged his talents into those of the team. He did anything and everything asked of him. He was the ultimate gentleman and team-player. Because of this, people who only saw the NBA version of Dr. J. really have no idea how much more spectacularly he had played in the ABA.

Kaner
05-27-2014, 08:59 PM
PG Chris Paul
SG Joe Dumars
SF Kevin Durant
PF Dirk Nowitzki
C Dikembe Mutombo

This roster has no holes. Paul is arguably better than all but two of the PGs on the "cheat code" list and he has literally no holes in his game. Everyone went the Allen/Pippen route with the wings, but Pippen was a pretty mediocre outside shooter. By going Dumars/Durant, I get the best peak player of that group (Durant), superior outside shooting and I still get to have an all-time great perimeter defender who was a No. 2 for multiple championship teams.

As for the front court, I'd like to have kept Garnett, but Dirk's offensive prowess and clutch postseason play were too good to pass up. He'd be an unstoppable force against PFs of almost any area and by placing him between Durant and Mutombo, I'm not going to suffer at all in the rebounding department. This team could beat any roster anybody could throw at it using other players.

I like it personally perfer Mourning over Mutombo and Pippen over Durant or KG over Dirk so the scoring hierarchy is clearer.


Biggest player I would disagree with is Dumars. His best defensive years don't coincide with his improved 3pt range later in his career so your getting either or not really a true 3 and D player that am guessing your going for. That's why I went with Cooper on my last team. His best 3pt shooting the same year he won dpoy.

edit: I do think going Dirk is the best choice, like I said early I think he's the best (proven) offensive player available.

mightybosstone
05-28-2014, 09:12 AM
I always say, about "my top 4 (KAJ, Magic, MJ & Wilt) that I can live with anybody's list AS LONG AS they have these 4, in any order, within their top 5 - you obviously do. A strong argument can be made for any order amongst these four. (I've been getting on my own case a little, in my head I mean, for not yet having made a semi-complete case for why I have KAJ as my #1 - I think I'll get on that right after posting this. Please let me know what you think (as if you wouldn't - hehe))
I don't get your argument for putting Kareem or Magic as 1 and 2 over Jordan. There is literally zero statistical argument for putting Magic over Jordan and the only argument you can use for Kareerm is longevity, which is a pretty weak argument considering Jordan missed several years of his career in his prime where he could have still put up ridiculous numbers. Any list that doesn't have Jordan at No. 1 is pretty questionable, IMO.


I've got Dr. J. #10. I DO count the ABA (except it's first 2 years; when it was clearly inferior) as equal (at least as far as it's All-Stars) to the NBA at that time. imo, Dr. J's ABA years (viewed unfortunately by so few people) were perhaps the greatest Peak any pro B-Ball player ever had.
Except this isn't remotely true. Lebron and MJ both crushed Erving's ABA peak, and they did it in the NBA, not the ABA. And there's a reason why Erving's numbers took a serious hit in the NBA. Because the NBA was a superior league with superior talent. You saw it with a lot of guys who switched leagues in the 70s, Gilmore and Barry included.

I understand your love for Dr. J, and I don't think we should view his ABA years negatively. He was still by far the best player of that league who won multiple titles and multiple MVPs. But we also can't take the numbers at face value, because he joined the NBA at 26 while still in his prime and put up substantially poorer numbers the rest of his career, save for a pretty damn good stretch from 80-83 that still wasn't quite up to this ABA caliber numbers.


Another thing. When Dr. J. came to the NBA he WAS still capable of doing all his greatest stuff. (He only lost some of his explosiveness years later). But his coach asked him to tone the individual stuff down for the good of the multi-star team he was now a part of. Dr. J. (who I have in my Top 5 All-Time TEAM-mates) dutifully, merged his talents into those of the team. He did anything and everything asked of him. He was the ultimate gentleman and team-player. Because of this, people who only saw the NBA version of Dr. J. really have no idea how much more spectacularly he had played in the ABA.
He played fewer minutes, but his USG% and FGA per 36 minutes didn't go down that much. So I don't think he did nearly as much sacrificing as you're making it seem.

Bottom line, though, if you include Dr. J in your top 10, which of these players is he leap frogging to get there?

Michael Jordan
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
Magic Johnson
Lebron James
Wilt Chamberlain
Tim Duncan
Bill Russell
Hakeem Olajuwon
Shaquille O'Neal
Larry Bird
Kobe Bryant

Because he has to jump two of these players in order to do it, in addition to Moses, West and Oscar, who I'd also probably rank ahead of him.

mightybosstone
05-28-2014, 09:22 AM
I like it personally perfer Mourning over Mutombo and Pippen over Durant or KG over Dirk so the scoring hierarchy is clearer.
But we're talking an All-Time team, so I don't think I'd really want a "scoring hierarchy." And I get why you'd want Pippen and Mourning, but I'd rather have a true No. 1 and an all-time defensive anchor at C than two No. 2s and a center who wasn't quite up to Mutombo's caliber.


Biggest player I would disagree with is Dumars. His best defensive years don't coincide with his improved 3pt range later in his career so your getting either or not really a true 3 and D player that am guessing your going for. That's why I went with Cooper on my last team. His best 3pt shooting the same year he won dpoy.
Yeah, I don't agree with this very much. I understand what you're saying in that Dumars didn't become a high volume 3-point shooter until later in his career, but in the five seasons he made All-Defense, he topped 37.5% four times and 40% three times. Also, just because he didn't make All-Defensive teams later in his career doesn't mean the guy still couldn't play excellent defense.

Also, with Dumars, you get a guy who could legitimately put points on the board and do so efficiently on a championship caliber team. You don't get that with Cooper, who was never anything more offensively than a 5th option when he was on the floor and whose 3-point shooting varied greatly throughout his career from season to season. I understand the justification for wanting Cooper, but I think you get more with Dumars as an overall player than just defense and 3-point shooting.


edit: I do think going Dirk is the best choice, like I said early I think he's the best (proven) offensive player available.
I think Paul, Durant and Dirk in any order were three of the five or six best offensive players left on the board. I seriously considered taking Barkley, but I didn't want the defense to suffer too much, and I wanted a little bit more of a reliable perimeter shooter at the 4.

Kaner
05-28-2014, 01:11 PM
But we're talking an All-Time team, so I don't think I'd really want a "scoring hierarchy." And I get why you'd want Pippen and Mourning, but I'd rather have a true No. 1 and an all-time defensive anchor at C than two No. 2s and a center who wasn't quite up to Mutombo's caliber.

Why wouldn't a scoring hierarchy be welcomed when your talking all-time team? Like I said before I think a key ingredient to this is deciding who you think is the best offensive player available and pick him (for me Dirk). With Pippen, and Mourning both of them are great #2 offensive weapons which is what you want when you've got Dirk in crunch time and both of them are all-time defenders. With Durant and Mutombo your getting either/or instead of the balanced games of Mourning and Pippen. Both Mutombo and Mourning are all-time defensive anchors. Mutombo is a little better but as long as the other team doesn't have a Shaq, Hakeem, etc. Then Mourning will offer basically the same thing defensively but with range and an offensive game.

Yeah, I don't agree with this very much. I understand what you're saying in that Dumars didn't become a high volume 3-point shooter until later in his career, but in the five seasons he made All-Defense, he topped 37.5% four times and 40% three times. Also, just because he didn't make All-Defensive teams later in his career doesn't mean the guy still couldn't play excellent defense.

Seemed to be trying to be intentionally misleading here by just posting percentages. he only made more then 1 a game in one of those seasons and only attempted more then 1 a game twice. Dumars was an overrated defender in the first place though after Rodman left they were consistently terrible defensively

Also, with Dumars, you get a guy who could legitimately put points on the board and do so efficiently on a championship caliber team. You don't get that with Cooper, who was never anything more offensively than a 5th option when he was on the floor and whose 3-point shooting varied greatly throughout his career from season to season. I understand the justification for wanting Cooper, but I think you get more with Dumars as an overall player than just defense and 3-point shooting.

I guess the points are nice especially with Mutombo downlow but I assumed you just wanted a 3-d player. Cooper was an example of an all-time great defender who had in his career hit 3pt shots at a decent clip, Eddie Jones could probably fill Dumars role better than he can even.

I think Paul, Durant and Dirk in any order were three of the five or six best offensive players left on the board. I seriously considered taking Barkley, but I didn't want the defense to suffer too much, and I wanted a little bit more of a reliable perimeter shooter at the 4.

Yeah thats pretty much what I said earlier. Personally I think it's Dirk since their isn't anybody you can put on him and feel confident they could stop him or even really limit him but an argument can be made for probably 6 or 7 guys.
.

Pablonovi
05-28-2014, 02:28 PM
.

Key Kaner,
Excuse my ignorance (I should have asked this question months ago); but what exactly does a "." (dot) mean?

Kaner
05-28-2014, 09:57 PM
Key Kaner,
Excuse my ignorance (I should have asked this question months ago); but what exactly does a "." (dot) mean?

I can't respond within the quote without putting some sort of character down outside of the quote

Pablonovi
05-29-2014, 11:29 AM
I can't respond within the quote without putting some sort of character down outside of the quote

Hey Kaner,
Thanx.
I'm glad I asked; because I've seen these dots * before; and I would have never guessed that that was their "function". I had thought they were either just typo-type mistakes; or the poster saying they either agreed or disagreed with the post they were responding to. (Does this make any sense?)

* dots or spots other than just "in my head" (I'm kind of used to that kind, hehe)

Chronz
05-29-2014, 12:59 PM
Except this isn't remotely true. Lebron and MJ both crushed Erving's ABA peak, and they did it in the NBA, not the ABA. And there's a reason why Erving's numbers took a serious hit in the NBA. Because the NBA was a superior league with superior talent. You saw it with a lot of guys who switched leagues in the 70s, Gilmore and Barry included.
The ABA was weak at first, just as the NBA was weakened by the ABA strengthening itself, so much so that there is very little slippage in Barry's play when he rejoined the NBA. Barry actually credits the ABA for making him a more complete player, if that means anything to you. So while the ABA was weaker, by the time of the merger, the difference wasn't very profound IMO. Gervin, for instance, had his best years in the NBA despite being an ABA star. I understand he was an ascending player but it just goes to show how the 2 leagues were closing the talent gap.

Ervings numbers took a hit because he deferred more than ever.


because he joined the NBA at 26 while still in his prime and put up substantially poorer numbers the rest of his career, save for a pretty damn good stretch from 80-83 that still wasn't quite up to this ABA caliber numbers.
AKA , the years Philly decided to build AROUND him, and not just amass overrated stars together.



He played fewer minutes, but his USG% and FGA per 36 minutes didn't go down that much. So I don't think he did nearly as much sacrificing as you're making it seem.
I disagree, going from leading the league in possessions used to playing a role player like 32MPG with a 25% usage is a very significant adjustment. We can discredit him for not adapting as well as other players, but there is no doubt, had he been a part of a team that prioritized his play/development (as the Sixers eventually did), he and his teams would have been more successful.

Make no mistake, Pablo isn't making it "Seem" like anything, its a known fact that the ENTIRE TEAM admits to, those guys were a bunch of me-first players, Doc should have been a bigger priority, and the only reason they had the relative success that they did (aside from superior talent differential) was because Doc-J humbly stepped aside and played the role of a glue guy. The guy is a natural leader, but not the kind that bends others to his will, more the kind to adapt to the team around him. Pure class.


Bottom line, though, if you include Dr. J in your top 10, which of these players is he leap frogging to get there?

Michael Jordan
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
Magic Johnson
Lebron James
Wilt Chamberlain
Tim Duncan
Bill Russell
Hakeem Olajuwon
Shaquille O'Neal
Larry Bird
Kobe Bryant

Because he has to jump two of these players in order to do it, in addition to Moses, West and Oscar, who I'd also probably rank ahead of him.
Agreed but he made some good points, if we ignore team success, I can see the argument. Different priorities I guess.

I take bigger offense to him putting more stock in longevity than peak play. His top-5 list is very inconsistent IMO.

Pablonovi
05-29-2014, 01:50 PM
The ABA was weak at first, just as the NBA was weakened by the ABA strengthening itself, so much so that there is very little slippage in Barry's play when he rejoined the NBA. Barry actually credits the ABA for making him a more complete player, if that means anything to you. So while the ABA was weaker, by the time of the merger, the difference wasn't very profound IMO. Gervin, for instance, had his best years in the NBA despite being an ABA star. I understand he was an ascending player but it just goes to show how the 2 leagues were closing the talent gap.

Ervings numbers took a hit because he deferred more than ever.


AKA , the years Philly decided to build AROUND him, and not just amass overrated stars together.



I disagree, going from leading the league in possessions used to playing a role player like 32MPG with a 25% usage is a very significant adjustment. We can discredit him for not adapting as well as other players, but there is no doubt, had he been a part of a team that prioritized his play/development (as the Sixers eventually did), he and his teams would have been more successful.

Make no mistake, Pablo isn't making it "Seem" like anything, its a known fact that the ENTIRE TEAM admits to, those guys were a bunch of me-first players, Doc should have been a bigger priority, and the only reason they had the relative success that they did (aside from superior talent differential) was because Doc-J humbly stepped aside and played the role of a glue guy. The guy is a natural leader, but not the kind that bends others to his will, more the kind to adapt to the team around him. Pure class.


Agreed but he made some good points, if we ignore team success, I can see the argument. Different priorities I guess.

I take bigger offense to him putting more stock in longevity than peak play. His top-5 list is very inconsistent IMO.

Hey High Horse,
It is ALWAYS an honor to be in threads with you. You have such vast-comprehensive NBA-knowledge and your arguments are incisive and well-thought out.

Excellent post; except ...
Why'd you have to ruin everything by saying my Top-5 list is very inconsistent (aside from it being that?) hehe

But actually, think about it:
Except for KAJ (who easily had 16-18 Great Years) the other 4 on my list had/have about 11 Great Years. (MJ, for example "played" 15 years; but 2 were his Wizard years - he wasn't "Great" then; and two were years in which he played less than half a season - so they also can't count as Great).

So, on the Longetivity thing, only KAJ stands out and WAY OUT (50% more great years than the other 4 - that's half a career, that's HUGE, in my book); and the others would have to be judged on all the other valid critera MINUS that (as compared to KAJ alone in my top 5).

EVERYBODY SHOULD ASK THEMSELVES THIS QUESTION:
IF MJ HAD PLAYED MORE GREAT YEARS, WOULDN'T HIS CAREER HAVE BEEN EVEN BETTER?

You can't give MJ "credit" for "well, he would have been great and won more Chips" when he didn't even play. He could have gotten injured (it happens). He could have more-exhausted himself and won Chips those years only to not win them later on. No one can say; so this can NOT be a PLUS.

If MJ had played 5-7 more great years (and have made 4 more Finals, without any Chips); wouldn't it be obviously true that he would have had a much greater career and reputation?
Well, KAJ DID DO just that (10 Finals in 20 years! 15 All-NBA 1st+2nd Teams (and IF they had had 3rd teams back then, he would have had some of them too!)

PEAK:
How long (exactly, more or less, hehe) is PEAK supposed to be.
I claim that KAJ's 3 Years: 71-73, were/was the GREATEST 3-YEAR PEAK ever. Look up the advanced stats - those 3 years were 3 of the top 4 All-Time WS/48 (all higher than Magic's, MJ's, and LBJ's #1 year).

PRIME:
Is there an "official" or even generally accepted "definition" of "PRIME"? For me, what this means is:
"That extended period of time, beyond but including PEAK, during which they were GREAT (as in All-NBA Teams Great). So, while PEAK might be 3, or 4 or 5 years; I'd say PRIME is however many years their Top 3 at their position Greatness lasted. For KAJ, that was 16-18 Years. For the other 4 guys in my Top 5, that was pretty much 11 years. 16-18 is HUGELY greater Greatness than 11!

KAJ VS MJ
Obviously, THE LONGER-LASTING THE GREATNESS, THE GREATER THE GREATNESS
Greatness WITH Longetivity beats Greatness without it, no? Otherwise, I'd have Walton in my Top GOAT 5. MJ had 11 Great Years, period. KAJ had 16+ Great Years (that's 50% more, about half an career extra - that's huge).

MJ's Missing Years = An Tremendous Argument AGAINST MJ (not one in his favor)
The argument about MJ's missing years is completely backwards. He DIDN'T play so he doesn't and can't get credit for them. On the other hand, he didn't play (the first 1.5 years due to his own fault, he got caught gambling. He should have been banned for life and lost all his reputation / credit - but he chose quitting. For me this is HUGELY BAD against him.

CAREER WIN SHARES RANK:
1. KAJ 273.41
2 WILT 247.26
3. K.Malone 234.63
4. MJ 214.02

KAJ had 28% MORE Win Shares than MJ. That's not a small amount; it's a lot.

CAREER OFFENSIVE WIN SHARES RANK:
1. KAJ 178.92
2. WILT 153.34
3. Oscar 151.99
4. MJ 149.88

KAJ has 19.4% MORE than MJ. That's not a small amount; it's a lot.

CAREER DEFENSIVE WIN SHARES RANK:
3. KAJ 94.47
5. WILT 93.92
21. MJ 64.13

KAJ has 47.3% MORE than MJ. That's not a small amount; it's a HUGE amount.

CAREER WIN SHARES / 48min RANK
1. MJ .2505
7. KAJ .2284

MJ has less than 10% more than KAJ; and this was because of Magic & the Lakers (Magic’s greatness reduced KAJ’s Win Shares there much more than Pippen’s greatness reduced MJ’s.

btw, Win Shares IS important because it measures WINNING which is "the name of the game", and dominance doing it, which is "the name of the game" when it comes to All-Time Greatness.

I DO put much more weight on the ALL-NBA TEAMS (not All-Star teams, btw)
If I only had one "stat" to work with; it'd be the ALL-NBA (and ALL-ABA) 1st, 2nd & 3rd Teams.

Why? Because the voters for that award, over the years, have come very, very close (much closer than the MVP-award voters *, imo) to what I believe accurately reflected each player's performance relative-to-each other.

* For example, I got to watch ALL of Wilt's and Russell's careers. They faced each other some 140 games. Wilt absolutely out-played Bill in virtually all those games. He was WAY the better player. So, the All-NBA Teams have Wilt soundly beating Bill (Bill had 3 #1s and 8 #2s - exactly how I see it). But in MVP's Bill won twice when, imo, he should not have (once vs Pettit, once vs Wilt). Take those two MVP #s away from Bill (& give one to Wilt; thus Wilt would have 5, and Bill 3) and the MVPs look a lot closer to reality and to the All-NBA teams.

Pablonovi
05-29-2014, 02:08 PM
DR. J. In MY NBA ALL-TIME GOAT TOP 10
I have him replacing Bird (because, in my opinion he beats him (SLIGHTLY) in everything important:
PEAK (higher)
PRIME (longer)
CAREER (longer top quality; Dr. J =16 Years All-Star; Bird = )

I've got Bird in the 11-15 with exactly the guys you mention: West, O, Moses, & Stockton)

I've got Russell in the 16-20 group (he was all-time #1 on D; but his O was way-poor. IF he'd been on half the teams in the League back then, he might not have won a single Chip; if somebody like Wilt or Nate (or one or two other top Centers) had been in his place, they would have won about the same number of Chips).

Here's the Dr. J excerpt from a fabulous article titled:
The Pantheon: An Examination of Basketball Greatness, Part III
by David Friedman, (His blog: "20 Second Timeout") Thursday, January 17, 2008
LINK: http://20secondtimeout.blogspot.mx/2008/01/return-of-pro-basketball-news-and.html

"One of the greatest peak value seasons in pro basketball history has never received the attention it deserves because it took place in a now-defunct league. In 1975-76, the New York Nets’ Julius Erving ranked first in the ABA in scoring, fifth in rebounding, seventh in assists, third in steals and seventh in blocked shots. He also placed eighth in two point field goal percentage and seventh in three point field goal percentage. Incredibly, Erving actually increased his production in the postseason, culminating in these numbers in the 1976 ABA Finals versus the Denver Nuggets: 37.7 ppg (including 45 points and the game winning shot on the road in game one), 14.2 rpg, 6.0 apg, 3.0 spg and 2.2 bpg. The Doctor led both teams in all of these categories during the series—and he was putting up these unbelievable numbers against high quality opposition. Guided by Hall of Fame coach Larry Brown, the Nuggets finished 65-19 that season, featuring two Hall of Famers (Dan Issel and David Thompson) and one of the best defensive forwards of all time (Bobby Jones). After trying in vain to stop the Doctor, Bobby Jones offered this appraisal of Erving’s heroics: “He destroys the adage that I’ve always been taught—that one man can’t do it alone.”

One could make a case that no one has ever played basketball better than Dr. J did in that season, particularly his playoff performances against deep, talented San Antonio and Denver teams; in fact, Newsweek’s Pete Axthelm, in a May 1976 article titled “Sky King,” suggested that Erving was indeed the greatest player the game had seen at that time. ABA Commissioner (and Hall of Fame forward) Dave DeBusschere offered this oft-repeated summary of Erving’s impact: “Plenty of guys have been ‘The Franchise.’ For us, Dr. J is ‘The League.’”

Erving did not quite reach that level of statistical dominance combined with championship winning performance before or after that campaign, but he made the All-Star team in each of his 16 seasons and won three other regular season MVPs. Erving’s career combines high peak value with impressive durability; he ranked among the best players in the game for most of his career, as indicated by his 12 combined All-NBA and All-ABA selections (including nine First Team nods, five in the NBA and four in the ABA). Erving was an outstanding clutch performer who generally played his best in the biggest games; he averaged 24.2 ppg in his regular season career but increased that number to 28.1 ppg in 33 NBA/ABA Finals games, winning three championships in six appearances. Erving’s career scoring average of 25.5 ppg in the NBA Finals is the eighth best all-time and he scored at least 20 points in 21 of his 22 Finals games, including his first 19, a streak that still ranks among the longest ever. In his two trips to the ABA Finals, Erving averaged 33.4 ppg, scored at least 20 points in 10 of 11 games, topped 30 points eight times and had three 40 point games. His output in Finals games mirrors West’s in many ways—and he won more championships than West did—but because Erving’s two most spectacular Finals’ performances happened in the ABA (and his third best happened in 1977 in a losing cause) many people don’t realize just how well Erving performed in those situations.

Erving’s 1981 NBA MVP ended the nearly two decade long stranglehold that centers had over that honor and paved the way for other non-centers to win the award. Erving was the first NBA/ABA, NFL, MLB or NHL player to be a member of 16 straight playoff teams, a record since broken by Karl Malone (19) and John Stockton (19)."

Pablonovi
05-29-2014, 02:25 PM
If You Never Got To See Dr. J In The ABA; You Missed Perhaps THE Greatest PLAYS Ever

iirc, I got to see the ABA-version of Dr. J twice live-in-person; and a couple of dozen live-on-TV games.

What I saw I've never ever seen elsewhere or elsewhen. He had giant hands*, a giant wing-span, incredible gliding powers; truly unlimited moves, near-total versitality on Offense (and a legitimate D).

I remember, on a number of occasions, Dr J went "coast to coast": grabbing a rebound, seeing no teammate out ahead of him to pass to; and taking it the length of the court. What was special about these particular full-court drives was that:

he'd dribble the ball between his legs forward if necessary to weave between defenders and not even miss a beat in ball-control or speed. THAT I've never seen anybody else ever come close to. But this is just a small indication of his absolute-wizardry. Double and triple teams could not stop him from scoring on drives. Which opened up huge space for his sweet Js.

AND, OH, THOSE DRIVES TO THE HOOP !
Perhaps the most special thing about Dr. J, was NOT his dunks (spectacularly shocking though they were); but his non-dunk drives. Dr. J must have had 25 different-distinct moves near the hoop; you never knew which he'd pull out of his hat; but you did know it was going to be something to bring down the house. One of my favorites, of course, was what he did against "my team" the Lakers in the Finals one year. He started on one side of the key, hung and swooped past most of the Lakers team, ending up on the opposite side of the rim, and backwards spinning the sweetest shot of all time off the rim and in.

But he (and most of his fans of the time) swear that he had a number of others that were more spectacular. I am SURE this is the case.

* I'm not sure, but I'd bet they were bigger than MJ's hands; and when he held the ball, it actually looked SMALL in his hands.

P.S. This post does NOT address what was CLEARLY the Greatest Thing about the Great Dr. J: his class. This man was both the ULTIMATE TEAM-MATE (as or more coachable than any other NBA-ABA-er ever) AND the ULTIMATE DIPLOMAT FOR THE GAME (both during and after his career). Because of this, even more than because of his phenomenal play on the court; imo, he was THE BEST THING that ever happened to Pro-Basketball. (Remember, during those times, the NBA had reached its lowest low perhaps ever. DR. J was HUGE in reversing that.)

kobe4thewinbang
05-29-2014, 04:09 PM
C/ DeMarcus Cousins
PF/ Paul Millsap
SF/ Paul Pierce
SG/ Rip Hamilton
PG/ Steve Nash