PDA

View Full Version : PSD's Official #22 Player of All Time



ManRam
08-17-2014, 09:52 AM
Voting for #21 has concluded and PSD's Official #21 NBA Player of all time is....

Bob Pettit

Voting

Bob Pettit 14
Dwyane Wade 10
Patrick Ewing 5
Scottie Pippen 3
John Stockton 3
Elgin Baylor 2
Isiah Thomas 2
John Havlicek 1
Clyde Drexler 1

Rick Barry 0
Clyde Frazier 0
George Gervin 0
Kevin McHale 0
George Mikan 0
Chris Paul 0


The List:

http://forums.prosportsdaily.com/showthread.php?871758-PSD-s-Top-50-List-of-the-Greatest-NBA-Players-of-All-Time&p=28837457#post28837457

Per the usual, vote, explain and nominate.

We have added Bill Walton, Kevin Durant and Bob Cousy to the poll.

ATX
08-17-2014, 10:34 AM
Dirk was voted #20. Pettit was #21.

WaDe03
08-17-2014, 11:05 AM
Wade again. Smh

ManRam
08-17-2014, 11:13 AM
Dirk was voted #20. Pettit was #21.

Forgot to switch the name. Thanks.


I think it's a little unsettling seeing Wade fall further past Dirk, but the argument for Hondo is strong. The guy has played in over 500 more games than Wade. He's scored almost 1,000 more points. Wade has a slight advantage with per game stats, but the end of his career will even that out for sure.

However, I do think Wade had a much stronger peak. The PER game is huge. Wade's scoring efficiency destroys Hondo's. Thus far Wade has been a stronger playoff performer. He has one of the best Finals runs ever.

I think there's a fair argument for either. I guess it comes down to whether you prefer the longevity and team success Hondo saw or the peak play and dominance that Wade saw. I tend to lean with the latter, but the longevity gap is huge enough that you wont see me arguing too much about it.

ShawnKemp
08-17-2014, 11:18 AM
I think it's hilarious that Lebron could only barely win 2 rings with D. Wade who PSD ranks near top 20. Yet Jordan won 6 Rings with Pippen who PSD barely ranks in the top 50.

ShawnKemp
08-17-2014, 11:30 AM
How bout Robert Parish?

23334 points
14715 rebounds
2180 assists
1219 steals
2361 blocks
54% fgs

ManRam
08-17-2014, 11:34 AM
I think it's hilarious that Lebron could only barely win 2 rings with D. Wade who PSD ranks near top 20. Yet Jordan won 6 Rings with Pippen who PSD barely ranks in the top 50.

Well, MJ is ranked #1 and LeBron is ranked #8, so I don't think people are overlooking these things. I will say, Wade's absolute prime, which is the foundation of what makes him a top-25 player for me, all took place before LeBron arrived. His 2006, 2007, 2009 and 2010 seasons were without a doubt his 4 best. He made zero 1st-Team All-NBA teams when LeBron was there, and just one 2nd-Team. That's pretty comparable to what Pippen was doing when those Bulls teams were winning rings.

Wade has that 2006 ring which is probably the trump card over Pippen. If Pippen won a ring without MJ I'm sure he'd go ahead of Wade.

Raidaz4Life
08-17-2014, 11:39 AM
Ugh I hate Wade in an all time ranking argument. Its too tough for me to judge his position because he has only played over 70 games in 5 seasons. He has essentially no longevity argument whatsoever which I put a lot of weight on. Way more weight than titles anyway. His advanced stats are pretty incredible though... ugh. I think I like Ewing here.

ShawnKemp
08-17-2014, 11:46 AM
Well, MJ is ranked #1 and LeBron is ranked #8, so I don't think people are overlooking these things. I will say, Wade's absolute prime, which is the foundation of what makes him a top-25 player for me, all took place before LeBron arrived. His 2006, 2007, 2009 and 2010 seasons were without a doubt his 4 best. He made zero 1st-Team All-NBA teams when LeBron was there, and just one 2nd-Team. That's pretty comparable to what Pippen was doing when those Bulls teams were winning rings.

Wade has that 2006 ring which is probably the trump card over Pippen. If Pippen won a ring without MJ I'm sure he'd go ahead of Wade.

Are you serious?
Dude, Wade was still in his prime for a few years while James was there. And plus injuries and stuff like that happens. You think Pippen was always 100% in the final seasons with the Bulls?

You're looking at PPG WAY TOO MUCH. It's not even funny. Of course Wade's PPG won't be what they were in 08. He wasn't the number one option because Lebron was there then and took the reigns, but make no mistake about it, Wade was in his prime and he's still putting up similar seasons to his prime ages. Remember he was always somewhat insconsistent. He's 32 now. Let's stop acting like he's 40 years old when Lebron had him. Let's stop making excuses for Lebron James and Dwyane Wade, ok, can we do that.


Pippen played in a better East, everyone says this and knows this, it's a fact. It was much better, it's not even close compared the the minor league teams the east throws out there now up and down the board.

Pippen is considered the best wing defender in NBA history. I happen to place him second to Jordan.
Pippen won 6 NBA titles as the second best player on the team.

I won't even get into the Wade gifted title that he didn't win by himself like some think. Shaq was a 20 and 10 player still a starting All Star and second in MVP votes. Let's not act like Shaq at 33 wasn't any good He was still the best Center in the NBA. Also even Phil Jackson was asked that summer if he thought the Finals was fixed or heavily favored against the Mavericks. He said "Isn't it obvious" "Cuban will find out soon enough who's league it is".

ManRam
08-17-2014, 11:50 AM
Are you serious?
Dude, Wade was still in his prime for a few years while James was there. And plus injuries and stuff like that happens. You think Pippen was always 100% in the final seasons with the Bulls?

You're looking at PPG WAY TOO MUCH. It's not even funny. Of course Wade's PPG won't be what they were in 08. He wasn't the number one option because Lebron was there then and took the reigns, but make no mistake about it, Wade was in his prime and he's still putting up similar seasons to his prime ages. Remember he was always somewhat insconsistent. He's 32 now. Let's stop acting like he's 40 years old when Lebron had him. Let's stop making excuses for Lebron James and Dwyane Wade, ok, can we do that.


Pippen played in a better East, everyone says this and knows this, it's a fact. It was much better, it's not even close compared the the minor league teams the east throws out there now up and down the board.

Pippen is considered the best wing defender in NBA history. I happen to place him second to Jordan.
Pippen won 6 NBA titles as the second best player on the team.

I won't even get into the Wade gifted title that he didn't win by himself like some think. Shaq was a 20 and 10 player still a starting All Star and second in MVP votes. Let's not act like Shaq at 33 wasn't any good He was still the best Center in the NBA. Also even Phil Jackson was asked that summer if he thought the Finals was fixed or heavily favored against the Mavericks. He said "Isn't it obvious" "Cuban will find out soon enough who's league it is".

Trust me, I didn't look at PPG at all.


Wade was still VERY VERY good the first two years LeBron was in Miami, no doubt. But he wasn't like he was earlier in his career, that is all. And I stand by the rest of what I said. He was better than Pippen ever was at times before LeBron came. He was far more like Pippen always was (I mean, they're different players in general) when LeBron came. That's all.

Deep breaths!


But again, MJ is #1 and LeBron is #8. That huge gap certainly takes the stuff you're mentioning into account. It's not like we voted LeBron at #2 or anything. We know MJ did more than anyone else ever has and often with less, including when compared to LeBron. This isn't breaking news.

WaDe03
08-17-2014, 11:57 AM
I think it's hilarious that Lebron could only barely win 2 rings with D. Wade who PSD ranks near top 20. Yet Jordan won 6 Rings with Pippen who PSD barely ranks in the top 50.

Watch your mouth.

ShawnKemp
08-17-2014, 12:03 PM
22582 points
9077 rebounds
7183 assist
2702 steals
1132 blocks

while being the best defensive wing ever

All this for Scottie Pippen for everygame he played in the NBA including the NBA Postseason.

Does Wade's career add up to any of these metrics?

DR_1
08-17-2014, 12:12 PM
Stockton for me.

ShawnKemp
08-17-2014, 12:13 PM
Are you serious?
Dude, Wade was still in his prime for a few years while James was there. And plus injuries and stuff like that happens. You think Pippen was always 100% in the final seasons with the Bulls?

You're looking at PPG WAY TOO MUCH. It's not even funny. Of course Wade's PPG won't be what they were in 08. He wasn't the number one option because Lebron was there then and took the reigns, but make no mistake about it, Wade was in his prime and he's still putting up similar seasons to his prime ages. Remember he was always somewhat insconsistent. He's 32 now. Let's stop acting like he's 40 years old when Lebron had him. Let's stop making excuses for Lebron James and Dwyane Wade, ok, can we do that.


Pippen played in a better East, everyone says this and knows this, it's a fact. It was much better, it's not even close compared the the minor league teams the east throws out there now up and down the board.

Pippen is considered the best wing defender in NBA history. I happen to place him second to Jordan.
Pippen won 6 NBA titles as the second best player on the team.

I won't even get into the Wade gifted title that he didn't win by himself like some think. Shaq was a 20 and 10 player still a starting All Star and second in MVP votes. Let's not act like Shaq at 33 wasn't any good He was still the best Center in the NBA. Also even Phil Jackson was asked that summer if he thought the Finals was fixed or heavily favored against the Mavericks. He said "Isn't it obvious" "Cuban will find out soon enough who's league it is".

I see Jordan is 1 and Lebron is 8th. But are you failing to factor the the East was about 3 times as good back then? Cause this is a huge factor in grading players.

Also wasn't Pippen somewhat more durable in the 20's and even early 30's.

I realize Wade is a good player and usually All NBA first team. But what do you mean he "wasn't the same" when Lebron got there. Sounds like an excuse to me. You'll have to expound more if you could please. You are factoring in that Lebron was then taking a lot of the shots, so of course the ppg for Wade will drop some, but that doesn't mean the player is not good anymore or even still at an All NBA Level.

If you say you don't look at ppg, then don't.

Pippen
7-8 boards in his prime
6-7 assist in his prime
2-3 steals in his prime
1 block in his pime

and one of the top 2 defensive wings ever


Wade

5 boards in his prime
6-7.5 assist in his prime
2 steals in his prime
1 block in his prime

Tried sometimes on defense,
not as durable
and needed Shaq, Mourning, Payton and David Stern big time to get anywhere in the Playoffs.


The stats for Pippen are more solid and he didn't miss 20 games a season like Wade.

WaDe03
08-17-2014, 12:13 PM
22582 points
9077 rebounds
7183 assist
2702 steals
1132 blocks

while being the best defensive wing ever

All this for Scottie Pippen for everygame he played in the NBA including the NBA Postseason.

Does Wade's career add up to any of these metrics?

Wades played 11 seasons to Scottie Pippens like 17. Wades career isn't even over yet and he's still considered better than Pippen. It probably won't be close by the time he retires.

Wades prime ***** on Pippen and that's not close. Pippen did nothing as a number 1 option in his career while Wade won a championship with the greatest performance in history.

DR_1
08-17-2014, 12:14 PM
Wades played 11 seasons to Scottie Pippens like 17. Wades career isn't even over yet and he's still considered better than Pippen. It probably won't be close by the time he retires.

Wades prime ***** on Pippen and that's not close. Pippen did nothing as a number 1 option in his career while Wade won a championship with the greatest performance in history.

No he is not considered better than Pippen.

WaDe03
08-17-2014, 12:15 PM
Sad thing is due to injuries Wades really only played like 9 seasons.

ShawnKemp
08-17-2014, 12:20 PM
The 90's and 80's in general are being overlooked here and on purpose by most here because it's easy to see they have an agenda.


A couple facts about the 90's. Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett, and Dirk Nowtizki are actually 90's players at the soul.

How has Lebron done against these players usually?

Just a thought.

Shammyguy3
08-17-2014, 12:21 PM
leaning toward Wade for his peak play, even though his Finals performance against the Mavs was reffed ridiculously tight you still have to give him a great amount of credit. To regurgitate my thoughts from the last thread: I believe after Wade, then it's Hondo. Then, it's Stockton/Pippen/McHale/Baylor in some order

Shammyguy3
08-17-2014, 12:23 PM
The 90's and 80's in general are being overlooked here and on purpose by most here because it's easy to see they have an agenda.


A couple facts about the 90's. Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett, and Dirk Nowtizki are actually 90's players at the soul.

And Jordan/Hakeem/Malone/Stockton/Barkley/etc are 80s players "at the soul." Now the 90s all of a sudden got a lot weaker :rimshot:

ShawnKemp
08-17-2014, 12:25 PM
No he is not considered better than Pippen.


I know right, I can't stand when people make stupid statements like this, because one guy down the street from them considered it.

Really you need like millions and millions of people saying it for many years for it to finally be somewhat considered, then you also need many former NBA players to say it.

WaDe03
08-17-2014, 12:25 PM
No he is not considered better than Pippen.

You'd love him if he was on the Bulls.

KnicksorBust
08-17-2014, 12:28 PM
The more I think about Pippen the more he starts to make sense here... but if I like Pippen so much, than Hondo probably deserves it more than him.

ShawnKemp
08-17-2014, 12:30 PM
leaning toward Wade for his peak play, even though his Finals performance against the Mavs was reffed ridiculously tight you still have to give him a great amount of credit. To regurgitate my thoughts from the last thread: I believe after Wade, then it's Hondo. Then, it's Stockton/Pippen/McHale/Baylor in some order


You didn't get what I was saying.

Duncan is like 49 years old and is a 90's player and a 2000's player, but he's like 49 years old now and still beats lebron rather easily.

Maybe the 90's had some great players. Maybe also the 80's had some great player too. like Isiah Thomas, I think he was a good player he was a great "big game" player if we go back and look. Patrick Ewing made up one of the best defenses the league has ever seen, won a ton of games against all time greats.
Maybe James Worthy was pretty good too. Didn't he usually play well in the playoffs. I remember him being unstoppable in the post and scoring usually over 7 footers inside the lane.


I wonder what Prime Nowitzki, Duncan or Garnett would do to James. They already pretty much own him in the playoffs, Now what about 27 year old Garnett? or 27 year old Duncan?

ShawnKemp
08-17-2014, 12:46 PM
27682 points
13042 rebounds
2490 assist
1258 steals
3197 blocks


Is this a good NBA career for combined Regular Season and Post Season stats?

I haven't compared it with other careers, Does it stack up?

todu82
08-17-2014, 12:50 PM
Elgin Baylor.

WaDe03
08-17-2014, 01:01 PM
TodWilkinson.

ManningToTyree
08-17-2014, 02:04 PM
TodWilkinson. I wonder what ShawnKemp's thoughts are on Patrick Ewing

Bruno
08-17-2014, 02:35 PM
I start pushing Scottie Pippen here. possibly the greatest wing defender in NBA history, a nice long career with respectable numbers. I buy arguments for Hondo, Baylor, McHale, Thomas, Wade and maybe Stockton and thats it here.

Ewing, no way.

WaDe03
08-17-2014, 02:41 PM
I wonder what ShawnKemp's thoughts are on Patrick Ewing

He's the GOAT!

KnicksorBust
08-17-2014, 03:32 PM
I start pushing Scottie Pippen here. possibly the greatest wing defender in NBA history, a nice long career with respectable numbers. I buy arguments for Hondo, Baylor, McHale, Thomas, Wade and maybe Stockton and thats it here.

Ewing, no way.

When I compare Scottie to Hondo it's tough to make the argument. Their careers are extremely similar. Two of the greatest swiss army knife players of all-time. Pass, score, defend all at elite levels. Statistically they are extremely similar as well. The only significant differences that I notice Hondo's Celtics won 2 more titles (with Hondo even getting an NBA Finals MVP) and Hondo's peak lasted about 5 years longer than Scottie's. Scottie was amazing from about 91-97 and just good before and after that. Meanwhile Hondo was basically 20-5-5 from 1964 to 1977. I gotta give the longer prime and extra success to Hondo. His era recognized it as well. He was a 4x member of All-NBA 1st team and a 7x member of All-NBA 2nd team. Pippen meanwhile a 3x member of All-NBA 1st, 2x 2nd, 2x 3rd. Hondo's longevity also put him into 13 all-star games compared to Pippen's 7. The longevity is the difference for me.

John Havlicek.

XpLiCiTT
08-17-2014, 03:33 PM
It's very sad that to PSD Dwyane Wade is the #22nd best player of all-time. Hilarious, actually.

Bruno
08-17-2014, 03:35 PM
When I compare Scottie to Hondo it's tough to make the argument. Their careers are extremely similar. Two of the greatest swiss army knife players of all-time. Pass, score, defend all at elite levels. Statistically they are extremely similar as well. The only significant differences that I notice Hondo's Celtics won 2 more titles (with Hondo even getting an NBA Finals MVP) and Hondo's peak lasted about 5 years longer than Scottie's. Scottie was amazing from about 91-97 and just good before and after that. Meanwhile Hondo was basically 20-5-5 from 1964 to 1977. I gotta give the longer prime and extra success to Hondo. His era recognized it as well. He was a 4x member of All-NBA 1st team and a 7x member of All-NBA 2nd team. Pippen meanwhile a 3x member of All-NBA 1st, 2x 2nd, 2x 3rd. Hondo's longevity also put him into 13 all-star games compared to Pippen's 7. The longevity is the difference for me.

John Havlicek.

I guess I should reconsider the longevity factor but in no universe do I buy Hondo being on the same level as Pippen defensively.

Shammyguy3
08-17-2014, 03:36 PM
It's very sad that to PSD Dwyane Wade is the #22nd best player of all-time. Hilarious, actually.

Who left on the poll is clearly superior to Wade then? Because I think a number of people on here believe Wade can fall down at least a few more spots. But those people also understand nothing's clearly white/black in a debate like this. So, who would you take over Wade left on the poll without hesitation

KnicksorBust
08-17-2014, 03:46 PM
It's very sad that to PSD Dwyane Wade is the #22nd best player of all-time. Hilarious, actually.

:laugh: The hilarious part of these threads to me is that amount of people that want to come in and mock a ranking without actually contributing anything of value to the thread. If you think Wade is not good enough to be 22, then name someone who is better and make an argument. Right now he's only got 5 of the 14 votes. If you throw you vote at John Havlicek then you can be a part of the solution and not the problem...or you could continue to be a bystander with his nose in the air if that's your preference? :)

KnicksorBust
08-17-2014, 03:47 PM
Who left on the poll is clearly superior to Wade then? Because I think a number of people on here believe Wade can fall down at least a few more spots. But those people also understand nothing's clearly white/black in a debate like this. So, who would you take over Wade left on the poll without hesitation

I'm convinced that at least half of the people that complain about the rankings would do a horrific job actually convincing anybody how they should be changed.

Raidaz4Life
08-17-2014, 03:51 PM
Are people actually seriously considering Hondo? I thought it was a running joke at first. This is exactly why people need to stop taking titles into consideration for GOAT. Next we will be discussing Robert Horry. John Havlicek... you can't be serious.


Also John Stockton is my favorite player of all time but he is overrated like crazy here apparently.

KnicksorBust
08-17-2014, 03:52 PM
I guess I should reconsider the longevity factor but in no universe do I buy Hondo being on the same level as Pippen defensively.

Conversely, do you think Pippen ever could have averaged 29ppg / 7.5apg / 8.4 FTA per game on the offensive end like Havlicek?

KnicksorBust
08-17-2014, 03:55 PM
Are people actually seriously considering Hondo? I thought it was a running joke at first. This is exactly why people need to stop taking titles into consideration for GOAT. Next we will be discussing Robert Horry. John Havlicek... you can't be serious.


Also John Stockton is my favorite player of all time but he is overrated like crazy here apparently.

Are you serious?

Robert Horry never even made an all-star team.
John Havlicek made 13.

How are they even on the same planet in terms of an all-time ranking? When did Horry drop 29ppg/9rpg/7.5apg for an entire season?

HORRIBLE comparison.

Raidaz4Life
08-17-2014, 04:04 PM
Are you serious?

Robert Horry never even made an all-star team.
John Havlicek made 13.

How are they even on the same planet in terms of an all-time ranking? When did Horry drop 29ppg/9rpg/7.5apg for an entire season?

HORRIBLE comparison.

playing 45 MINUTES A GAME. Adjust that to 36 minutes and you get a whopping 22.9ppg/7.1rpg/5.9apg

And thats with the pace advantage of that era as well. If they had per 100 poss statistics for that season, it would look even less impressive. The Horry comparison was intended to be hyperbole, but the point stands that there are far greater players left on the board. Hondo barely cleared a 20 PER only 3 times in his career. There is virtually nothing impressive about his statistical career to warrant taking him that high.

ShawnKemp
08-17-2014, 04:31 PM
It's very sad that to PSD Dwyane Wade is the #22nd best player of all-time. Hilarious, actually.

Absolutely rediculous. I actually have Wade for many reasons not even higher than David Thompson.

ShawnKemp
08-17-2014, 04:32 PM
When I compare Scottie to Hondo it's tough to make the argument. Their careers are extremely similar. Two of the greatest swiss army knife players of all-time. Pass, score, defend all at elite levels. Statistically they are extremely similar as well. The only significant differences that I notice Hondo's Celtics won 2 more titles (with Hondo even getting an NBA Finals MVP) and Hondo's peak lasted about 5 years longer than Scottie's. Scottie was amazing from about 91-97 and just good before and after that. Meanwhile Hondo was basically 20-5-5 from 1964 to 1977. I gotta give the longer prime and extra success to Hondo. His era recognized it as well. He was a 4x member of All-NBA 1st team and a 7x member of All-NBA 2nd team. Pippen meanwhile a 3x member of All-NBA 1st, 2x 2nd, 2x 3rd. Hondo's longevity also put him into 13 all-star games compared to Pippen's 7. The longevity is the difference for me.

John Havlicek.

Look at the FG% and the All World Defense Scottie played. Also 6 Titles in the Golden Era

ShawnKemp
08-17-2014, 04:34 PM
Are people actually seriously considering Hondo? I thought it was a running joke at first. This is exactly why people need to stop taking titles into consideration for GOAT. Next we will be discussing Robert Horry. John Havlicek... you can't be serious.


Also John Stockton is my favorite player of all time but he is overrated like crazy here apparently.

+100

ShawnKemp
08-17-2014, 04:35 PM
I hope Wade goes here, It just makes Jordan look even better and James look even worse.

ShawnKemp
08-17-2014, 04:41 PM
27682 points
13042 rebounds
2490 assist
1258 steals
3197 blocks


Now someone post Wades career numbers, and you'll see what a joke they are compared to someone like Patrick Ewing who should've gone in the top 15 and if we were doing a draft off as GM's he'd go in the top 15 everytime. He's too good to pass up. Even if your team already has a center. Anyone can draft SG's and SF's and even dominant PG's in the later 30's and 40's, But there are only so many truly dominant 7 footers to play and be able to move like Ewing did in the playoffs. Plus you have to factor in that a defensive center can change the tenure of a game or series. He could make an opposing team one dimentional and then the wings could zero in and shut players down. It's what Lebron's lacked on his teams over the years.

ShawnKemp
08-17-2014, 04:43 PM
Ewing led his team to a game 7 vs a Back to Back Champ. No monkey business from the refs like Wade got in his finals. No easy East to run through like many of the Eastern players get now.

KnicksorBust
08-17-2014, 04:44 PM
playing 45 MINUTES A GAME.

Yeah... ? Being able to play 45mpg is a huge bonus for his argument not a negative. He was an iron-man at the time. Imagine the praise and admiration we would have for a modern day star playing elite 2-way basketball for 45mpg? Your response should have been "And he was able to play over 45mpg! Wowza! :speechless:" Or if you aren't a fan of Wowza ... something to that effect.


Adjust that to 36 minutes and you get a whopping 22.9ppg/7.1rpg/5.9apg

#1.) You say that like that it wouldn't make him a "whopping" top 5 perimeter player in the game today. It would.

#2.) I've seen people try and argue that a player should get more minutes by using PER 36 and extrapolating statistics but I've never seen someone take away ACTUAL proven statistics to try and prove a point. Congratulations. Unfortunately he earned those numbers so he gets to keep them.


And thats with the pace advantage of that era as well. If they had per 100 poss statistics for that season, it would look even less impressive. The Horry comparison was intended to be hyperbole, but the point stands that there are far greater players left on the board. Hondo barely cleared a 20 PER only 3 times in his career. There is virtually nothing impressive about his statistical career to warrant taking him that high.

Virtually nothing impressive?

Havlicek's game was so well-rounded that his career averages of 20.4ppg / 6.2rpg / 4.7apg are historic. How many players in NBA History were able to average more points/rebounds/assists than Havlicek in their careers?

Here is the complete list:
Rick Barry
Larry Bird
LeBron James
Michael Jordan

I don't think it's a coincidence 3 of those names are long gone from this list. If being on a statistical list with MJ/Bird/LeBron doesn't count as more than "virtually nothing impressive" than you might want to consider lowering the bar.

ShawnKemp
08-17-2014, 04:48 PM
Yeah... ? Being able to play 45mpg is a huge bonus for his argument not a negative. He was an iron-man at the time. Imagine the praise and admiration we would have for a modern day star playing elite 2-way basketball for 45mpg? Your response should have been "And he was able to play over 45mpg! Wowza! :speechless:" Or if you aren't a fan of Wowza ... something to that effect



#1.) You say that like that it wouldn't make him a "whopping" top 5 perimeter player in the game today. It would.

#2.) I've seen people try and argue that a player should get more minutes by using PER 36 and extrapolating statistics but I've never seen someone take away ACTUAL proven statistics to try and prove a point. Congratulations. Unfortunately he earned those numbers so he gets to keep them.



Virtually nothing impressive?

Havlicek's game was so well-rounded that his career averages of 20.4ppg / 6.2rpg / 4.7apg are historic. How many players in NBA History were able to average more points/rebounds/assists than Havlicek in their careers?

Here is the complete list:
Rick Barry
Larry Bird
LeBron James
Michael Jordan

I don't think it's a coincidence 3 of those names are long gone from this list. If being on a statistical list with MJ/Bird/LeBron doesn't count as more than "virtually nothing impressive" than you might want to consider lowering the bar.

I see you only look at numbers and titles.

I like Pippen above any wing player left.

ShawnKemp
08-17-2014, 04:57 PM
I see some of you only go by rings or whatever. I like to watch them play to see who was great.

otherwise lets just go straight down the list and do it your way and say

1. Russell is the best ever, 11 Titles
2. S. Jones 10 titles he's the second best ever
3. Havlicek 8 titles
4. Tom Heinsohn 8 titles
5. KC Jones 8 titles
6. Tom Sanders 8 titles
7. Frank Ramsey 7 titles
8. Robert Horry 7 Titles
9. Kareem Abdul- Jabbar 6 titles
10. Jim Loscutoff 6titles


Those are the top ten. You can't agrue with it because they "Got them Rings" If we're going to put weight on Ringzzz then lets put weight on Ringzz

Cause I'm seeing most of these debates are really not opinionated and they are trying to just be settled by Rings or if a player got a lead dog ring, or this or that bla bla blaw.

KnicksorBust
08-17-2014, 04:59 PM
Look at the FG% and the All World Defense Scottie played. Also 6 Titles in the Golden Era

Just so we're on the same page... I write an entire paragraph comparing their full careers, accolodades, accomplishments, etc.

And your brilliant counter argument to get me to change my mind is FG%, defense, and 2 less titles?

Try again.


I see you only look at numbers and titles. But have you ever seen Pippen play? The guy was amazing on the court. Some would say he was the most gifted athlete ever. Sort of like Jordan but 6'8 and longer.

I'm an over 30 Knicks fan so it's possible I accidently watched him once or twice while singing "Go NY go NY go!"


Also do we know what Havlicek's Stats are for steals and blocks. Was he a playmaker on defense?

Yeah I mean making All-NBA Defensive team for almost a decade straight is a pretty compelling case wouldn't you say?


Pippen is the last SF in the NBA to make dunking on center the norm. Now days SF's are too soft to challenge a center head on

Yeah LeBron and Durant never dunk... What?

JAZZNC
08-17-2014, 05:02 PM
Stockton.

ShawnKemp
08-17-2014, 05:07 PM
Scottie, Ewing, Isiah should've all gone around 15 honestly. They were that good, No, they didn't just play for stats. They played to win.

Robinson, Malone and Barkley should've gone closer to 10-15. Actually Robinson should've gone around 7.


Gaurantee if all theses players were in their primes today and the NBA GM's were to draft a full roster, Gaurantee you Robinson would go in the top 7. Infact some might even take him 2nd. Yes, that is right second best player ever to Michael Jordan. Just the sheer production he could put up night in and night out both offensively and defensively. Plus being a good character guy helps a franchise aswell and helps make players better. An average night in his prime he'd put up a boxscore of something like 27 points 13 rebounds, 5 blocks, 2 steals, and 3 assist. Very regular game for David Robinson in his prime.

KnicksorBust
08-17-2014, 05:09 PM
I say the eye test is the best.
Actually watching them play. I'm not saying Havlicek wasn't great, he was... But come man... Scottie Pippen.


otherwise lets just go straight down the list and do it your way and say

1. Russell is the best ever, 11 Titles
2. S. Jones 10 titles he's the second best ever
3. Havlicek 8 titles
4. Tom Heinsohn 8 titles
5. KC Jones 8 titles
6. Tom Sanders 8 titles
7. Frank Ramsey 7 titles
8. Robert Horry 7 Titles
9. Kareem Abdul- Jabbar 6 titles
10. Jim Loscutoff 6titles


Those are the top ten. You can't agrue with it because they "Got them Rings" If we're going to put weight on Ringzzz then lets put weight on Ringzz

Cause I'm seeing most of these debates are really not opinionated and they are trying to just be settled by Rings or if a player got a lead dog ring, or this or that bla bla blaw.

And this is where you auto-lose. On the previous page of this thread (http://forums.prosportsdaily.com/showthread.php?873713-PSD-s-Official-22-Player-of-All-Time&p=28937904#post28937904) I openly mocked the idea that Robert Horry should even be considered at this point and then you create a list with Robert Horry on it to dispute a phantom argument that I never made and clearly disagreed with in this very thread. :pity:

ShawnKemp
08-17-2014, 05:10 PM
Stockton.

Stockton is a great player, I've got him around 35 or so.

ShawnKemp
08-17-2014, 05:16 PM
Just so we're on the same page... I write an entire paragraph comparing their full careers, accolodades, accomplishments, etc.

And your brilliant counter argument to get me to change my mind is FG%, defense, and 2 less titles?

Try again.



I'm an over 30 Knicks fan so it's possible I accidently watched him once or twice while singing "Go NY go NY go!"



Yeah I mean making All-NBA Defensive team for almost a decade straight is a pretty compelling case wouldn't you say?



Yeah LeBron and Durant never dunk... What?


Ah man, well come on, You're biased. You're a Knicks fan, that's why you don't like Pippen.

I'm 33 years old and I guarantee you I've seen more and know more about the game than you do.

Raidaz4Life
08-17-2014, 05:18 PM
Yeah... ? Being able to play 45mpg is a huge bonus for his argument not a negative. He was an iron-man at the time. Imagine the praise and admiration we would have for a modern day star playing elite 2-way basketball for 45mpg? Your response should have been "And he was able to play over 45mpg! Wowza! :speechless:" Or if you aren't a fan of Wowza ... something to that effect.

Basically what I am hearing is "you're right, putting it into proper context using a more level standard, his stats are not all that impressive"



#1.) You say that like that it wouldn't make him a "whopping" top 5 perimeter player in the game today. It would.

How many of the top 5 perimeter players today are being discussed in this argument? Last time I checked Durant doesn't have a single vote and he is the second best perimeter player today


#2.) I've seen people try and argue that a player should get more minutes by using PER 36 and extrapolating statistics but I've never seen someone take away ACTUAL proven statistics to try and prove a point. Congratulations. Unfortunately he earned those numbers so he gets to keep them.

Sure, I have no problem with him keeping them. But lets not pretend he wasn't playing an extra 2/3 of a quarter in order to do so




Virtually nothing impressive?

Havlicek's game was so well-rounded that his career averages of 20.4ppg / 6.2rpg / 4.7apg are historic. How many players in NBA History were able to average more points/rebounds/assists than Havlicek in their careers?

Several players still on the board have far more impressive numbers but you're right, your criteria of arbitrary statistics should be the standard here.


Here is the complete list:
Rick Barry
Larry Bird
LeBron James
Michael Jordan

I don't think it's a coincidence 3 of those names are long gone from this list. If being on a statistical list with MJ/Bird/LeBron doesn't count as more than "virtually nothing impressive" than you might want to consider lowering the bar.

I have no problem voting Rick Barry ahead of Hondo as well

KnicksorBust
08-17-2014, 05:29 PM
Ah man, well come on, You're biased. You're a Knicks fan, that's why you don't like Pippen.

I'm 33 years old and I guarantee you I've seen more and know more about the game than you do.

Yeah I'm biased. That's why I'm arguing for a Celtic from the 70s over a Knick from my childhood. :laugh: Anyway, you're just baiting now so I'm done with you.

ShawnKemp
08-17-2014, 05:38 PM
The real top 50 ever

Jordan
Russell
Magic
Bird
Shaq
Hakeem
Robinson
Ewing
Robertson
Moses
Kareem
Barkley
Erving
Duncan
Pippen
Isiah
Chamberlain
Malone
Drexler
Nowtizki
McHale
Wilkins
Garnett
Worthy
Havlicek
Bryant
Hayes
West
Wade
Parish
Kemp
Barry
James
D. Johnson
K. Johnson
Stockton
C. Hawkins
Archibald
B. Walton
McAdoo
Webber
Durant
Miller
Payton
C. Maxwell
Rodman
Mourning
A. Mason
H. Grant
T. Parker
Stoudamire
Iverson
Finley
Cowens
X. McDaniel

And the list goes on. You can see there would become many ties or players that are both great but may play a different position like Mutombo and Mo Cheeks.




I like to base it on primes a lot. I factor in defense and compeition which some don't factor in at all.

ShawnKemp
08-17-2014, 05:41 PM
Yeah I'm biased. That's why I'm arguing for a Celtic from the 70s over a Knick from my childhood. :laugh: Anyway, you're just baiting now so I'm done with you.

Do you like Carmelo Anthony? What do you think about him. Because I'd say he's a terrible team player and a loser.

NYKalltheway
08-17-2014, 05:52 PM
KoB... these things don't even need an argument.

I'd vote for Ewing seeing he's tied with Wade atm but he doesn't deserve to be listed above Baylor, Havlicek, Thomas and a few others from the list (and a few others that aren't even listed yet lol). I'll pass though. The list is a travesty and contributing any more to it whether I vote for the winner or not makes me an accomplice.


Actually, I'd vote for Durant just for the laughs but I decided against it. Seriously, Durant???

NYKalltheway
08-17-2014, 05:58 PM
The real top 50 ever

Jordan
Russell
Magic
Bird
Shaq
Hakeem
Robinson
Ewing
Robertson
Moses
Kareem
Barkley
Erving
Duncan
Pippen
Isiah
Chamberlain
Malone
Drexler
Nowtizki
McHale
Wilkins
Garnett
Worthy
Havlicek
Bryant
Hayes
West
Wade
Parish
Kemp
Barry
James
D. Johnson
K. Johnson
Stockton
C. Hawkins
Archibald
B. Walton
McAdoo
Webber
Durant
Miller
Payton
C. Maxwell
Rodman
Mourning
A. Mason
H. Grant
T. Parker
Stoudamire
Iverson
Finley
Cowens
X. McDaniel


This looks like an extreme version of myself :D I like this guy. Kobe is spot on. Lebron is spot on, could even argue he's quite high. Kareem is low. Ewing is quite high. Nowitzki relatively high. Baylor obviously forgotten and should join the top 15. West too low. Durant should not be there (yet). Havlicek quite low. Chamberlain I don't mind seeing out of the top 15 as the criteria are varied (same applies to Mikan imo, either a top 5-15 guy or top 30 at best, depending on how you judge the players). Russell is either too high or at his normal whereabouts, again, depending on the criteria one sets.

KnicksorBust
08-17-2014, 06:02 PM
Basically what I am hearing is "you're right, putting it into proper context using a more level standard, his stats are not all that impressive"

I was pretty transparent but I will try again. Havlicek being able to produce at an elite level while playing 45mpg is good. When you factor in his abilities as a defensive player, to get that type of production for nearly an entire game has a huge impact and makes him stand out from some other players in this comparison.


How many of the top 5 perimeter players today are being discussed in this argument? Last time I checked Durant doesn't have a single vote and he is the second best perimeter player today

The point is not that the per 36 numbers are still historic but that even when you steal his production that he achieved he is still an all-star. What makes his career historic is that he surpassed those per 36 numbers and continued to do so for over a decade.


Sure, I have no problem with him keeping them. But lets not pretend he wasn't playing an extra 2/3 of a quarter in order to do so

Asked and answered.


Several players still on the board have far more impressive numbers but you're right, your criteria of arbitrary statistics should be the standard here.

#1.) I challenge the fact that using arbitrary criteria makes it invalid.

#2.) It's not even arbitrary. I didn't pick his statistics. They were already done for me. :laugh:


I have no problem voting Rick Barry ahead of Hondo as well

Who is your vote?

NYKalltheway
08-17-2014, 06:04 PM
Scottie, Ewing, Isiah should've all gone around 15 honestly. They were that good, No, they didn't just play for stats. They played to win.


Basketball nerds have forgotten (actually ommitted as they usually don't know much about basketball history) many of these type of players. Bobby Jones is also one of them. One of the biggest impact players I've ever seen, one that any team would die to have on their roster. Not the greatest talent but obviously had more value than players with immense talent but not the correct mentality or mind set.

This "play to win" attitude towards the game is what makes Michael Jordan the GOAT. It's also what puts Larry Bird in every normal basketball fan's top 10. It's what made Bill Russell the legend he is. Magic Johnson could have been the GOAT but he prefered to play basketball mostly as an entertainer.

ThuglifeJ
08-17-2014, 06:12 PM
HEY MANRAM I NOMINATE JASON KIDD, THANKS


HERES WHAT HE LOOKS LIKE
http://jerrybembry.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/kidd2.jpeg

ShawnKemp
08-17-2014, 06:14 PM
This looks like an extreme version of myself :D I like this guy. Kobe is spot on. Lebron is spot on, could even argue he's quite high. Kareem is low. Ewing is quite high. Nowitzki relatively high. Baylor obviously forgotten and should join the top 15. West too low. Durant should not be there (yet). Havlicek quite low. Chamberlain I don't mind seeing out of the top 15 as the criteria are varied (same applies to Mikan imo, either a top 5-15 guy or top 30 at best, depending on how you judge the players). Russell is either too high or at his normal whereabouts, again, depending on the criteria one sets.

Thanks, I like what you say about the game aswell. I just watch the game and look at all the stats myself and don't believe everylittle thing the media pumps out. Sure a lot in the media know what they're talking about and I'll listen to everyone, but some were saying lebron would win 8 titles etc etc. I remember some saying that Miami would win 70+ games and be a dynasty. So much for that.

I did forget a few names. It was a quick list, but I like where I got some of them. Baylor would be around 40.

B. King, Dantley, Aguirre, David Thompson and Gervin would also be in the mix somewhere around 45-55.

Oh, and Larry Johnson was one of the best in his day. He should be around 35 maybe.

I'm basing it on Primes for a 5 year stretch or so. Also some longevity is factored in.

Durant is there because he's had a very good 5-6 year stretch.

Oh yeah and Ralph Sampson should be somewhere around 40.. So now it's become a list of like 60.

ShawnKemp
08-17-2014, 06:22 PM
There's some 70's players I've seen video of and were really good... I'd have to find their names. Some played in the ABA.

J_M_B
08-17-2014, 07:15 PM
I'll go Wade here. I can't see the argument against him for a spot in the top 25

WaDe03
08-17-2014, 07:51 PM
It's very sad that to PSD Dwyane Wade is the #22nd best player of all-time. Hilarious, actually.

It's pretty sad he didn't crack top 20 honestly.

WaDe03
08-17-2014, 07:54 PM
27682 points
13042 rebounds
2490 assist
1258 steals
3197 blocks


Now someone post Wades career numbers, and you'll see what a joke they are compared to someone like Patrick Ewing who should've gone in the top 15 and if we were doing a draft off as GM's he'd go in the top 15 everytime. He's too good to pass up. Even if your team already has a center. Anyone can draft SG's and SF's and even dominant PG's in the later 30's and 40's, But there are only so many truly dominant 7 footers to play and be able to move like Ewing did in the playoffs. Plus you have to factor in that a defensive center can change the tenure of a game or series. He could make an opposing team one dimentional and then the wings could zero in and shut players down. It's what Lebron's lacked on his teams over the years.

Wades career isn't over yet. He's better than Ewing I'm sorry.

Tod I really do hope someone makes your dream come true and does one of these little drafts with you that you obsess with.

WaDe03
08-17-2014, 07:56 PM
Ewing led his team to a game 7 vs a Back to Back Champ. No monkey business from the refs like Wade got in his finals. No easy East to run through like many of the Eastern players get now.

Cool a game 7 lol how many championships though?

WaDe03
08-17-2014, 08:03 PM
The real top 50 ever

Jordan
Russell
Magic
Bird
Shaq
Hakeem
Robinson
Ewing
Robertson
Moses
Kareem
Barkley
Erving
Duncan
Pippen
Isiah
Chamberlain
Malone
Drexler
Nowtizki
McHale
Wilkins
Garnett
Worthy
Havlicek
Bryant
Hayes
West
Wade
Parish
Kemp
Barry
James
D. Johnson
K. Johnson
Stockton
C. Hawkins
Archibald
B. Walton
McAdoo
Webber
Durant
Miller
Payton
C. Maxwell
Rodman
Mourning
A. Mason
H. Grant
T. Parker
Stoudamire
Iverson
Finley
Cowens
X. McDaniel

And the list goes on. You can see there would become many ties or players that are both great but may play a different position like Mutombo and Mo Cheeks.




I like to base it on primes a lot. I factor in defense and compeition which some don't factor in at all.

If you like primes you should love Wade. Him Kobe and LeBron should be higher.

This is a terrible list.

flea
08-17-2014, 08:33 PM
Ewing again. You would think with all the Knicks fans on PSD that he would have a better representation, especially over someone like Wade who is a complete joke as a top 25 player at this point. I guess most of these Knicks fans are 12 anyway and only know Carmelo Anthony and JR Smith.

tredigs
08-17-2014, 08:57 PM
Ewing again. You would think with all the Knicks fans on PSD that he would have a better representation, especially over someone like Wade who is a complete joke as a top 25 player at this point. I guess most of these Knicks fans are 12 anyway and only know Carmelo Anthony and JR Smith.

Wade - who has a Finals MVP (would've had two had the Heat beat Dallas), 8 All NBA Teams to Pat's 7, .193 Career WS/48 to Pat's .165 PRIME WS/48, career 25.3 PER to Pat's PRIME 22.1, 152 Playoff Games on higher production than Pat's 135, and was top 5 in MVP voting 6 times to Ewing's 2.

When Wade peaked he was arguably the best player in the game; Ewing was never in that conversation. Had he developed his playmaking ability to even par for the position at any point in his career or not been absolutely demolished by Olajuwon in his sole Finals appearance (averaging 19/9/1 on 36% to Olajuwon's 27/9/4 on 50% despite a great regular season from Pat), you might have a stronger case with your nostalgic post here.

Wade > Ewing every way you slice it.

TWilkinsonisbac
08-17-2014, 08:59 PM
wade03 when you started watching the NBA right?
You're very biased and that's why you can't look at it objectively.


anyway, Ewing is much more of a Franchise player than wade ever was. Wade missed the playoffs in the easy east during his prime.
Also LOST two finals with Lebron James. Is actually three loses because even Wade knows the 06 Finals was rigged. Some people on the Mavs and in the national media made suggestion of it to Wade and he copped an attitude which if proof right there he knows it was rigged even. If it wasn't true, it wouldn't have bothered him so much.
Also More facts that it was rigged is that Dirk BEAT HIM IN 11 with LEBRON... HAHAHAHAAA That's proof that Dirk was really better than Wade in 06, but didn't get any calls and if you go back and watch you'll see that Dirk is being fouled on every play in each fourth quarter with no call. While Wade isn't even being touched and he's getting 10 free throws every 4th quarter in close games.


Ewing more Points, Rebounds, Blocks, FG%, Total Wins and played in a much better East.

Wade barely wins the East but needs First Team All NBA Shaq and a solid bench.

Ewing is the more dominant player and lasted longer.

TWilkinsonisbac
08-17-2014, 09:04 PM
The reason this site is not objective is because the moderators are all staunch miami fans and they try to kick you off if you make good points about Knicks players or Bulls players. That's miami so called rivals or they wish they could even qualify as a rivalery against those teams.

This site has biased moderators. Get a life piece of maggot chit moderators. We should all press charges on this chit site.

TWilkinsonisbac
08-17-2014, 09:07 PM
Ewing again. You would think with all the Knicks fans on PSD that he would have a better representation, especially over someone like Wade who is a complete joke as a top 25 player at this point. I guess most of these Knicks fans are 12 anyway and only know Carmelo Anthony and JR Smith.


There's a bunch of idiot miami and lebron punks here. Do you know of a real site where there are objective posters?

WaDe03
08-17-2014, 09:13 PM
wade03 when you started watching the NBA right?
You're very biased and that's why you can't look at it objectively.


anyway, Ewing is much more of a Franchise player than wade ever was. Wade missed the playoffs in the easy east during his prime.
Also LOST two finals with Lebron James. Is actually three loses because even Wade knows the 06 Finals was rigged. Some people on the Mavs and in the national media made suggestion of it to Wade and he copped an attitude which if proof right there he knows it was rigged even. If it wasn't true, it wouldn't have bothered him so much.
Also More facts that it was rigged is that Dirk BEAT HIM IN 11 with LEBRON... HAHAHAHAAA That's proof that Dirk was really better than Wade in 06, but didn't get any calls and if you go back and watch you'll see that Dirk is being fouled on every play in each fourth quarter with no call. While Wade isn't even being touched and he's getting 10 free throws every 4th quarter in close games.


Ewing more Points, Rebounds, Blocks, FG%, Total Wins and played in a much better East.

Wade barely wins the East but needs First Team All NBA Shaq and a solid bench.

Ewing is the more dominant player and lasted longer.

You're a joke

flea
08-17-2014, 09:13 PM
Win shares are a team stat that doesn't accurately account defense, and PER is a terrible stat that shouldn't even be looked at unless you're comparing two players with very similar styles and position. Ewing was a top 10 defender of any position, and has an argument for top 5, while also being a top 50 offensive player of all time. This whole list underrates defensive players, which Ewing certainly was, while inflating the rankings of offensive ones like Wade.

That Ewing got handled by Olajuwon is virtually meaningless - Hakeem did that to a lot of people. He did it to Robinson but for some reason PSD thinks he's markedly better than Ewing. We're talking about a guy I consider the GOAT of his position - it's like faulting Drexler for shooting 40% in the '92 Finals against Jordan/Pippen. It happens to great players, it's happened to Lebron even, when they run into elite players and teams that are just better than them.

Wade had a nice prime for a combo guard that can't shoot, but that is really it. The prime was short, the counting stats aren't there, and if it weren't for the rigged '06 Finals we probably wouldn't be having this conversation. And please, don't tell me he did anything by himself in those playoffs because he had a still very effective Shaq and his brothers in stripes. I was in Miami for the Finals (rooting for the Heat, even) but that was a shamefully officiated series and anyone that says otherwise is either a fanboy or doesn't recall it very well.

WaDe03
08-17-2014, 09:16 PM
The reason this site is not objective is because the moderators are all staunch miami fans and they try to kick you off if you make good points about Knicks players or Bulls players. That's miami so called rivals or they wish they could even qualify as a rivalery against those teams.

This site has biased moderators. Get a life piece of maggot chit moderators. We should all press charges on this chit site.

Then don't come on here this is like your 5th account lol. On any of those 5 accounts I haven't seen anyone who agrees with any of your "arguments".

tredigs
08-17-2014, 09:24 PM
Lmao - just went and googled some NBA All Time Lists; Ewing did not crack the top 25 in a single one I checked: peaking at 28 (on an old list with Lebron >35) and averaged 36.

flea
08-17-2014, 09:26 PM
Yeah I'm real concerned with what 15 year olds on Bleacher Report looking at PPG lists think. Fact is there weren't many better than Ewing defensively. It was just his tough luck that he played in the '90s with the Bad Boys, Michael and Dream.

tredigs
08-17-2014, 09:41 PM
Yeah I'm real concerned with what 15 year olds on Bleacher Report looking at PPG lists think. Fact is there weren't many better than Ewing defensively. It was just his tough luck that he played in the '90s with the Bad Boys, Michael and Dream.

Nice try, unfortunately none of them were Bleacher. Can you find me some links of any All Time Rankings that have Ewing in the top 25, let alone top 18 or wherever it is that your nostalgic mind has him?





That Ewing got handled by Olajuwon is virtually meaningless - Hakeem did that to a lot of people. He did it to Robinson but for some reason PSD thinks he's markedly better than Ewing. We're talking about a guy I consider the GOAT of his position - it's like faulting Drexler for shooting 40% in the '92 Finals against Jordan/Pippen. It happens to great players, it's happened to Lebron even, when they run into elite players and teams that are just better than them.



Hahaha please. And your excuse for the following season when his Knicks lost with HCA while he was out dueled by Rik Smits (who was then obliterated by a 22 yr old Shaq in the following series) having the week of his life against Pat = what?

The only top 25 list Ewing deserves to be placed on (and generally is) is career big-moment choke artist.

flea
08-17-2014, 09:51 PM
Like I said originally, I've been as critical as anyone of Ewing. I've even had Knicks fans upset with me for the things I've said. I'm not a Knicks fan, or Georgetown fan, or any particular fan of his. But he was a great defensive player.

But Ewing virtually had the same career as Robinson - better in some senses. But for some reason (rings, I guess), Admiral gets treated like he's one of the most underrated players ever while Ewing is allegedly worse than guys like D Wade. I mean give me a break.

KnicksorBust
08-17-2014, 09:52 PM
Ewing again. You would think with all the Knicks fans on PSD that he would have a better representation, especially over someone like Wade who is a complete joke as a top 25 player at this point. I guess most of these Knicks fans are 12 anyway and only know Carmelo Anthony and JR Smith.

Wade - who has a Finals MVP (would've had two had the Heat beat Dallas), 8 All NBA Teams to Pat's 7, .193 Career WS/48 to Pat's .165 PRIME WS/48, career 25.3 PER to Pat's PRIME 22.1, 152 Playoff Games on higher production than Pat's 135, and was top 5 in MVP voting 6 times to Ewing's 2.

When Wade peaked he was arguably the best player in the game; Ewing was never in that conversation. Had he developed his playmaking ability to even par for the position at any point in his career or not been absolutely demolished by Olajuwon in his sole Finals appearance (averaging 19/9/1 on 36% to Olajuwon's 27/9/4 on 50% despite a great regular season from Pat), you might have a stronger case with your nostalgic post here.

Wade > Ewing every way you slice it.

How does he compare to Hondo?

flea
08-17-2014, 09:52 PM
Oh and I wouldn't know about some internet guy's lists because I don't read them. They probably all put people like AI, Human Highlight Reel, and Wade above dominant 2-way centers. Doesn't mean they're right.

TWilkinsonisbac
08-17-2014, 10:03 PM
tredigs, you're getting owned here.

You even admitted you have to google random top 25 list to form your opinion. Pretty much more proves the point that you've never seen Patrick Ewing play a full game. Shows you really don't know what you're talking about

tredigs
08-17-2014, 10:06 PM
How does he compare to Hondo?

They're right there. Wade being the better offensive talent and Hondo clearly the better defensive talent (arguably the best wing defender of the 60's+70's), but both with two way games and the playoff dominance to boot. Very tough call for me, but I'd lean Wade.


tredigs, you're getting owned here.

You even admitted you have to google random top 25 list to form your opinion. Pretty much more proves the point that you've never seen Patrick Ewing play a full game. Shows you really don't know what you're talking about
To form my opinion? Lmao. Rather to prove that apparently no formed list on the subject agrees with Ewing in a top 25 All Time discussion.

NBAfan4life
08-17-2014, 10:15 PM
The real top 50 ever

Jordan
Russell
Magic
Bird
Shaq
Hakeem
Robinson
Ewing
Robertson
Moses
Kareem
Barkley
Erving
Duncan
Pippen
Isiah
Chamberlain
Malone
Drexler
Nowtizki
McHale
Wilkins
Garnett
Worthy
Havlicek
Bryant
Hayes
West
Wade
Parish
Kemp
Barry
James
D. Johnson
K. Johnson
Stockton
C. Hawkins
Archibald
B. Walton
McAdoo
Webber
Durant
Miller
Payton
C. Maxwell
Rodman
Mourning
A. Mason
H. Grant
T. Parker
Stoudamire
Iverson
Finley
Cowens
X. McDaniel

And the list goes on. You can see there would become many ties or players that are both great but may play a different position like Mutombo and Mo Cheeks.




I like to base it on primes a lot. I factor in defense and compeition which some don't factor in at all.
This is easily the worst list I've ever seen.

WaDe03
08-17-2014, 10:15 PM
tredigs, you're getting owned here.

You even admitted you have to google random top 25 list to form your opinion. Pretty much more proves the point that you've never seen Patrick Ewing play a full game. Shows you really don't know what you're talking about

What happened to ShawnKemp?

Legitimate
08-17-2014, 10:27 PM
I voted patrick ewing...no reason to say why I think he deserves the vote over dwade.

JustinTime
08-17-2014, 10:36 PM
PSD's list is stupid. Prime Kobe > Prime James any day.

TWilkinsonisbac
08-17-2014, 10:38 PM
I'd like to see wade try to get one of the top ALL NBA teams in the 80's or 90's. Yeah right. Those belonged to MJ, Magic, Isiah, and Glide.

TWilkinsonisbac
08-17-2014, 10:40 PM
Wade would have zero rings and wouldn't have even made it out of the first round had he played in the 80's or 90's. Latrell Sprewell would've even owned him.

Dade County
08-17-2014, 11:14 PM
Look at the FG% and the All World Defense Scottie played. Also 6 Titles in the Golden Era

Do you mean Jordan's/Stern ref blowing era. Where all these super star foul calls started.

This post is not in any means to knock down Scottie. I was just attacking the era lol

Dade County
08-17-2014, 11:18 PM
Wade would have zero rings and wouldn't have even made it out of the first round had he played in the 80's or 90's. Latrell Sprewell would've even owned him.

Wade would have been a poors man Jordan if he played in that era; as long as he got the same foul calls as his air'ness of course. lol

Prime Wade's speed would have completely overwhelmed teams in the 80's (but his jumper would have hurt him even more then it does now).

JAZZNC
08-18-2014, 12:28 AM
The real top 50 ever

Jordan
Russell
Magic
Bird
Shaq
Hakeem
Robinson
Ewing
Robertson
Moses
Kareem
Barkley
Erving
Duncan
Pippen
Isiah
Chamberlain
Malone
Drexler
Nowtizki
McHale
Wilkins
Garnett
Worthy
Havlicek
Bryant
Hayes
West
Wade
Parish
Kemp
Barry
James
D. Johnson
K. Johnson
Stockton
C. Hawkins
Archibald
B. Walton
McAdoo
Webber
Durant
Miller
Payton
C. Maxwell
Rodman
Mourning
A. Mason
H. Grant
T. Parker
Stoudamire
Iverson
Finley
Cowens
X. McDaniel

And the list goes on. You can see there would become many ties or players that are both great but may play a different position like Mutombo and Mo Cheeks.




I like to base it on primes a lot. I factor in defense and compeition which some don't factor in at all.
Shawn Kemp ahead of Stockton....and Barkley, Ewing, Robinson, and Erving ahead of Duncan is just preposterous!

Chronz
08-18-2014, 02:09 AM
HEY MANRAM I NOMINATE JASON KIDD, THANKS


HERES WHAT HE LOOKS LIKE
http://jerrybembry.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/kidd2.jpeg

I second this nomination.

Chronz
08-18-2014, 02:17 AM
F YEA

Tredigs getting his hands dirty finally.

I know you dont agree with the list but **** it man, just debate ball. Thats all this is about .

NYKalltheway
08-18-2014, 04:28 AM
if I vote for Ewing on this round I need his voters to promise that they're going for either Baylor or Hondo next. Wade is not a top 22-23 player, 30 at best.


I nominate James Worthy and "second" the nomination of Jason Kidd. Someone needs to save this sinking ship :D

Raidaz4Life
08-18-2014, 05:28 AM
if I vote for Ewing on this round I need his voters to promise that they're going for either Baylor or Hondo next. Wade is not a top 22-23 player, 30 at best.


I nominate James Worthy and "second" the nomination of Jason Kidd. Someone needs to save this sinking ship :D

I have no problem going with Baylor next round but Wade >>>> Hondo

naps
08-18-2014, 08:25 AM
Wade - who has a Finals MVP (would've had two had the Heat beat Dallas), 8 All NBA Teams to Pat's 7, .193 Career WS/48 to Pat's .165 PRIME WS/48, career 25.3 PER to Pat's PRIME 22.1, 152 Playoff Games on higher production than Pat's 135, and was top 5 in MVP voting 6 times to Ewing's 2.

When Wade peaked he was arguably the best player in the game; Ewing was never in that conversation. Had he developed his playmaking ability to even par for the position at any point in his career or not been absolutely demolished by Olajuwon in his sole Finals appearance (averaging 19/9/1 on 36% to Olajuwon's 27/9/4 on 50% despite a great regular season from Pat), you might have a stronger case with your nostalgic post here.

Wade > Ewing every way you slice it.


It's already a travesty Wade has fallen this far. And now he is being tied with Ewing LMFAO!

mightybosstone
08-18-2014, 08:47 AM
I think it's hilarious that Lebron could only barely win 2 rings with D. Wade who PSD ranks near top 20. Yet Jordan won 6 Rings with Pippen who PSD barely ranks in the top 50.
Pippen and Jordan had 10 postseasons together to win those six titles. Lebron and Wade had four postseasons. Last time I checked, it's impossible to win six championships in four seasons, but maybe my math's not so good. :shrug:

mightybosstone
08-18-2014, 08:49 AM
PSD's list is stupid. Prime Kobe > Prime James any day.

Based on what? Because any decent statistical criteria you use to judge players says prime James absolutely demolishes prime Kobe. Don't just say "player x > player y all day" and then not have anything to back it up with.

mightybosstone
08-18-2014, 09:15 AM
It so clearly should be Wade here. I don't even understand how Ewing is getting so many votes. Here's Ewing's career resume:

21/10/2/2/1 on .504/.740 shooting percentages
Peaked from about 90-94 with roughly a 25/11/2/1/3
Career 20.98 PER (37th all-time)
Career .1495 WS/48 (95th all-time)
46th in career PPG
57th in career RPG
11th in career BPG (finally something he's top 25 in!)
Two seasons with a PER over 23.0
Two seasons with a WS/48 over .200
One All-NBA 1st team, Six All-NBA 2nd teams
Zero All-Defensive 1st teams, Three All-Defensive 2nd teams
1 Finals appearance, 0 titles
Top 10 in MVP voting 7 times

Now let's look at Wade's resume:
24/6/5/2/1 on .492/.765 shooting percentages
Peaks from about 06-10 with roughly a 28/7/5/2/1
Career 25.29 PER (8th all-time)
Career .1921 WS/48 (27th all-time)
17th in career PPG
59th in career APG
29th in career SPG
Eight seasons with a PER over 23.0
Six seasons with a WS/48 over .200
Two All-NBA 1st teams, Three All-NBA 2nd teams, Three All-NBA 3rd teams
Zero All-Defensive 1st teams, Two All-Defensive 2nd teams
5 Finals appearances, 3 titles
Top 10 in MVP voting 7 times

And all of that is without pulling career postseason numbers, where Wade absolutely crushes Ewing. So somebody is going to have to explain to me how Ewing deserves to go ahead of Wade that makes any sense whatsoever. I look at those two resumes and there's a clear cut winner here.

NYKalltheway
08-18-2014, 09:40 AM
Okay, Wade is hired. Lol.

Numbers numbers numbers. If that's what we're doing here then why have a poll? Let's just have a stats committee decide who's the best hahaha

naps
08-18-2014, 10:15 AM
Except you haven't yet made a compelling post arguing why Ewing should be over Wade.

TWilkinsonisbac
08-18-2014, 11:02 AM
Except you haven't yet made a compelling post arguing why Ewing should be over Wade.

Yes, plenty of posters here have, you're just not paying attention and you never saw how Ewing could lead a team to around 55 wins without another All Star and usually the second or third round of the playoffs.

While the flip agruement is that Wade actually led his team to 15 wins while at the age of 26.


Also Ewing has nearly 10,000 more points, 6,000 more rebounds, and 2000 more blocks. That's a lot of make up. Also the fact that Ewing and the Knicks were a big deal in the 90's and were quite the NBA ticket. If you know what I mean. They were pulling higher ratings than Miami even has in the NBA playoffs.


These are all facts and not opinion. And no, three coatail rings for wade in the easy east and a league that was trying to get guards to the free throw line as much as possible does not overtake all the Ewing did for an entire decade in the 90's alone let alone the 80's where he had 5 great seasons.

The only thing the wade people have said is that wade has more rings. yeah, Wade never had to play Bad Boys, MJ, or Dream. Also wade was riding the coatails of the refs and lebron for each of those. Dirk proved that wade isn't that good when he beat both prime Wade and Prime Lebron in the Finals.

WaDe03
08-18-2014, 12:08 PM
Yes, plenty of posters here have, you're just not paying attention and you never saw how Ewing could lead a team to around 55 wins without another All Star and usually the second or third round of the playoffs.

While the flip agruement is that Wade actually led his team to 15 wins while at the age of 26.


Also Ewing has nearly 10,000 more points, 6,000 more rebounds, and 2000 more blocks. That's a lot of make up. Also the fact that Ewing and the Knicks were a big deal in the 90's and were quite the NBA ticket. If you know what I mean. They were pulling higher ratings than Miami even has in the NBA playoffs.


These are all facts and not opinion. And no, three coatail rings for wade in the easy east and a league that was trying to get guards to the free throw line as much as possible does not overtake all the Ewing did for an entire decade in the 90's alone let alone the 80's where he had 5 great seasons.

The only thing the wade people have said is that wade has more rings. yeah, Wade never had to play Bad Boys, MJ, or Dream. Also wade was riding the coatails of the refs and lebron for each of those. Dirk proved that wade isn't that good when he beat both prime Wade and Prime Lebron in the Finals.

Wade was injured that 15 win season but you saw what happened the season after that. His teammates were terrible.

It doesn't matter if you make it to the second round of the playoffs. If you don't win it all it means nothing really.

Wade outplayed Dirk both NBA finals. LeBron was terrible especially in the 4th quarter and just like the spurs last year Dirks teammates played great in the finals.

JAZZNC
08-18-2014, 12:14 PM
It so clearly should be Wade here. I don't even understand how Ewing is getting so many votes. Here's Ewing's career resume:

21/10/2/2/1 on .504/.740 shooting percentages
Peaked from about 90-94 with roughly a 25/11/2/1/3
Career 20.98 PER (37th all-time)
Career .1495 WS/48 (95th all-time)
46th in career PPG
57th in career RPG
11th in career BPG (finally something he's top 25 in!)
Two seasons with a PER over 23.0
Two seasons with a WS/48 over .200
One All-NBA 1st team, Six All-NBA 2nd teams
Zero All-Defensive 1st teams, Three All-Defensive 2nd teams
1 Finals appearance, 0 titles
Top 10 in MVP voting 7 times

Now let's look at Wade's resume:
24/6/5/2/1 on .492/.765 shooting percentages
Peaks from about 06-10 with roughly a 28/7/5/2/1
Career 25.29 PER (8th all-time)
Career .1921 WS/48 (27th all-time)
17th in career PPG
59th in career APG
29th in career SPG
Eight seasons with a PER over 23.0
Six seasons with a WS/48 over .200
Two All-NBA 1st teams, Three All-NBA 2nd teams, Three All-NBA 3rd teams
Zero All-Defensive 1st teams, Two All-Defensive 2nd teams
5 Finals appearances, 3 titles
Top 10 in MVP voting 7 times

And all of that is without pulling career postseason numbers, where Wade absolutely crushes Ewing. So somebody is going to have to explain to me how Ewing deserves to go ahead of Wade that makes any sense whatsoever. I look at those two resumes and there's a clear cut winner here.
Yeah, some people here seriously over value Ewing. Hell that one guy had Ewing ranked higher than Duncan. Some people just don't have a clue and there is no point arguing with them.

TWilkinsonisbac
08-18-2014, 12:20 PM
Ewing played in the era that honestly had the top 5 Teams in NBA history.

Bulls
late 80's Lakers
Bad Boys
Mid 80's Celtics
early 2000 Lakers.

I saw that wadefanboy said it doesn't matter to make it to the ECSF or ECF... That's the stupidest thing ever.
Yes it does, It makes money for the franchise first of all and it builds fans.


Wade never led a team to 55 wins without another All Star on the roster like Ewing did.

TWilkinsonisbac
08-18-2014, 12:24 PM
Yeah, some people here seriously over value Ewing. Hell that one guy had Ewing ranked higher than Duncan. Some people just don't have a clue and there is no point arguing with them.


You don't have a clue. You've never even seen any of these players play. Ewing in his prime averaged 28/11/and 4 big blocks a game and led his team to the second round of the EAST playoffs without another All Star. He beat the 80's CELTICS to do so.

Ewing in his prime was every bit as good as Duncan. Duncan has had better coaching over the years and has had more all stars around him.


I like how people are showing career averages and not factoring in that Ewing played about 5 years past his prime and played until he was 40.

You'd have to be an idiot to think that Wade's averages will stay the same if he plays until 40 years old.

TWilkinsonisbac
08-18-2014, 12:33 PM
Ewing averaged 23.7/10.4/2.2/1.1/2.8/52% during his first 11 seasons like Wade.

So they're the same at scoring virtually, with the slight edge to Ewing in FG%,
Ewing gets the large advantage ins defense and shotblocking. This is key because it causes opponents to become one dimensional. The 4 more assist Wade averages is not enough to overcome all the shots Ewing is altering and rebounding inside.

TWilkinsonisbac
08-18-2014, 12:47 PM
Here is some of Ewing's best games from the 89-90 season. A remarkable season because he was the only player ever to average 28+ points and blocks 4+ shots a game as well, that's the epitome of doing it on both ends.

44 points, 22 rebounds, 7 blocks, 2 steals, 4 assist
51 poinst, 18 rebounds, 1 steal, 1 assist
44 points, 24 rebounds, 4 assist, 3 blocks, 1 steal
37 points, 19 rebounds, 9 blocks, 2 assist, 1 steal
33 points, 12 rebounds, 8 blocks, 5 assist, 1 steal
37 points, 21 rebounds, 6 blocks, 3 assist, 1 steal
30 points, 18 rebounds, 6 blocks, 3 assist,


Can you say "Beast"

mightybosstone
08-18-2014, 01:58 PM
Okay, Wade is hired. Lol.

Numbers numbers numbers. If that's what we're doing here then why have a poll? Let's just have a stats committee decide who's the best hahaha

Numbers are a huge, huge part of the argument, but they're hardly the only part. Who has the greater individual accolades? Wade. Who has the greater postseason production? Wade. Who played in and won more titles? Wade. Who had the bigger, more memorable individual performances? Wade. Who was (by far) the better and more skilled offensive player? Wade.

I don't care what criteria you use to judge basketball players. Dwyane Wade was clearly the better player in his prime and has probably already had a superior career despite playing in far fewer games.

mightybosstone
08-18-2014, 02:08 PM
Here is some of Ewing's best games from the 89-90 season. A remarkable season because he was the only player ever to average 28+ points and blocks 4+ shots a game as well, that's the epitome of doing it on both ends.

44 points, 22 rebounds, 7 blocks, 2 steals, 4 assist
51 poinst, 18 rebounds, 1 steal, 1 assist
44 points, 24 rebounds, 4 assist, 3 blocks, 1 steal
37 points, 19 rebounds, 9 blocks, 2 assist, 1 steal
33 points, 12 rebounds, 8 blocks, 5 assist, 1 steal
37 points, 21 rebounds, 6 blocks, 3 assist, 1 steal
30 points, 18 rebounds, 6 blocks, 3 assist,

Can you say "Beast"

I don't care about how great a player performed within individual regular season games that don't matter. You want to see some stat lines from games that mattered? Look at these stat lines:

Game 1: 23/9/2/2/2 with 1 turnover on 38.5% shooting
Game 2: 16/13/6/2/2 with 6 turnovers on 36.8% shooting
Game 3: 18/13/7/1 with 3 turnovers on 31% shooting
Game 4: 16/15/3/1/1 with 1 turnover on 28.6% shooting
Game 5: 25/12/8/2/1 with 3 turnovers on 52.4% shooting
Game 6: 17/15/4/3 with 3 turnovers on 30% shooting
Game 7: 17/10/1/1/2 with 5 turnovers on 41.2% shooting

You know what those numbers are? Those are the stat lines from the only NBA Finals Ewing ever participated in. Aside from a monster Game 5, he was totally underwhelming in every other game. If you're going to pull random stat lines from a player's career, pull the ones that actually matter. These mattered, and he clearly wasn't up to the task.

JAZZNC
08-18-2014, 02:26 PM
You don't have a clue. You've never even seen any of these players play. Ewing in his prime averaged 28/11/and 4 big blocks a game and led his team to the second round of the EAST playoffs without another All Star. He beat the 80's CELTICS to do so.

Ewing in his prime was every bit as good as Duncan. Duncan has had better coaching over the years and has had more all stars around him.


I like how people are showing career averages and not factoring in that Ewing played about 5 years past his prime and played until he was 40.

You'd have to be an idiot to think that Wade's averages will stay the same if he plays until 40 years old.
I love the "you never saw them play" argument when you have no idea whether I did or not ha! I saw these guys play a lot. You lose all credibility when you say Ewing is as good as Duncan. I could dig up all kinds of things to prove my point but why bother when you obviously won't comprehend. It seems like it's pretty obvuois to everyone else.

Kempisback
08-18-2014, 02:41 PM
Numbers are a huge, huge part of the argument, but they're hardly the only part. Who has the greater individual accolades? Wade. Who has the greater postseason production? Wade. Who played in and won more titles? Wade. Who had the bigger, more memorable individual performances? Wade. Who was (by far) the better and more skilled offensive player? Wade.

I don't care what criteria you use to judge basketball players. Dwyane Wade was clearly the better player in his prime and has probably already had a superior career despite playing in far fewer games.


Who played in the greater League?? That affects accolades a great deal. Who played in the league with Air Jordan, Hakeem tha Dream, Shaq Diesel, Magic, Isiah, Larry Legend, The Admiral?


Who has Wade beaten as the leader of a team? Dirk, oh yeah with his brothas in stripes handing it to him. Ben Wallce? Who has he beat as the leader of a team?

Ewing beat, Larry Bird and Charles Barkley in the playoffs. He also beat Reggie Miller who is a great Playoff player, he beat Pippen, He beat Mourning... That's a pretty good resume going. He also took the GOAT Air Jordan to 7 games and 6 another time in the most watched ECF EVER!!!!!

Kempisback
08-18-2014, 02:47 PM
I love the "you never saw them play" argument when you have no idea whether I did or not ha! I saw these guys play a lot. You lose all credibility when you say Ewing is as good as Duncan. I could dig up all kinds of things to prove my point but why bother when you obviously won't comprehend. It seems like it's pretty obvuois to everyone else.

No, try to dig up some of it. See if you can find a 28/11/4 block season. Believe Me, Duncan is a great player and is still the number 1 player in the League that GM's that want to win would pick first today.

Ewing in his prime could POST, Could hit free throws, and could go out to 20 feet and drill jumpers.

He was 7 feet 250 pounds with a 7'6 wingspan and a 35 inch vertical leap and understood the game.
No one in their right mind would pick Wade over Ewing when starting a team.

Kempisback
08-18-2014, 02:50 PM
So because Ewing couldn't beat MJ and Pippen the greatest Duo in NBA history he's ranked in the low 20s.

I guess Wade did beat MJ and Pippen as well and that's why he's ranked so high.

mightybosstone
08-18-2014, 02:56 PM
Who played in the greater League?? That affects accolades a great deal. Who played in the league with Air Jordan, Hakeem tha Dream, Shaq Diesel, Magic, Isiah, Larry Legend, The Admiral?
I totally fail to see your point. The last 5-10 years has seen at least half dozen players that will likely go down as top 20-25 guys all-time. Wade played in the same era as Lebron, Duncan, Kobe, Shaq, Dirk, KG and Durant, as well as top 50 guys like Pierce, Allen, Paul, Kidd and Nash and other likely Hall of Famers like Billups, Parker, Gasol, Bosh and Dwight. You could make an argument that the NBA in the last 10 years has been every bit as talented as the league was from the late 80s to the late 90s.


Who has Wade beaten as the leader of a team? Dirk, oh yeah with his brothas in stripes handing it to him. Ben Wallce? Who has he beat as the leader of a team? Ewing beat, Larry Bird and Charles Barkley in the playoffs. He also beat Reggie Miller who is a great Playoff player, he beat Pippen, He beat Mourning... That's a pretty good resume going. He also took the GOAT Air Jordan to 7 games and 6 another time in the most watched ECF EVER!!!!!
Dirk is a top 20 caliber guy who was playing in his prime when Wade beat him, and he did it in the Finals. You're using players from the 90s without any context behind those teams. That 76ers team was a 7 seed and the No. 2 guy on that team was freaking Mike Gminski. He beat the Pippen Bulls without Jordan. Not an impressive feat. And Reggie Miller is one of the most overrated players on PSD. It's easier to ask who DIDN'T beat Reggie Miller in the playoffs than who did.

ManRam
08-18-2014, 03:08 PM
I second this nomination.

Thanks for quoting this, otherwise I wouldn't have seen it.

Kempisback
08-18-2014, 03:13 PM
I don't care about how great a player performed within individual regular season games that don't matter. You want to see some stat lines from games that mattered? Look at these stat lines:

Game 1: 23/9/2/2/2 with 1 turnover on 38.5% shooting
Game 2: 16/13/6/2/2 with 6 turnovers on 36.8% shooting
Game 3: 18/13/7/1 with 3 turnovers on 31% shooting
Game 4: 16/15/3/1/1 with 1 turnover on 28.6% shooting
Game 5: 25/12/8/2/1 with 3 turnovers on 52.4% shooting
Game 6: 17/15/4/3 with 3 turnovers on 30% shooting
Game 7: 17/10/1/1/2 with 5 turnovers on 41.2% shooting

You know what those numbers are? Those are the stat lines from the only NBA Finals Ewing ever participated in. Aside from a monster Game 5, he was totally underwhelming in every other game. If you're going to pull random stat lines from a player's career, pull the ones that actually matter. These mattered, and he clearly wasn't up to the task.

He was going against Dream, Thorpe and Horry, three great defenders and it was a defensive battle and defensive series.
How bout we pull up Wades finals from 2 months ago... What did the shoot guard average? 14 ppg

Ewing did well defensively and did play well in forcing a game 7 and would've won the entire thing if not for Starks. Ewing didn't have the refs bailing him out for 15 free throws a game.

you just don't like 90's basketball and that is what is wrong with you.


Why don't you post Wades stats for this past Finals punk ***.

mightybosstone
08-18-2014, 03:28 PM
He was going against Dream, Thorpe and Horry, three great defenders and it was a defensive battle and defensive series.
How bout we pull up Wades finals from 2 months ago... What did the shoot guard average? 14 ppg

Ewing did well defensively and did play well in forcing a game 7 and would've won the entire thing if not for Starks. Ewing didn't have the refs bailing him out for 15 free throws a game.

you just don't like 90's basketball and that is what is wrong with you.

Why don't you post Wades stats for this past Finals punk ***.

You're adorable! You're like a puppy that keeps running across the linoleum floor to chase after the ball even though he keeps sliding into the kitchen counter. ;)

First off, we're talking about peak and prime production. I don't care how well Wade played in these last Finals because the guy is well past his prime, just like I wouldn't judge Ewing too harshly for his postseason production in the playoffs after 97 (spoilers, it was really bad).

Secondly, why is it not fair to judge Ewing for his horrible postseason numbers in that series, but not look at the flip side and see how well Olajuwon performed in that series? Hakeem completely dominated in that series in spite of how good new York's defense was, posting 27/9/4/4/2 on 50% shooting. If Hakeem can post great numbers in the Finals against a great defensive center and defensive team, why can't Ewing?

And finally, you're just wrong that Ewing "did play well in forcing a game 7." The Knicks already had a 3-2 lead and Ewing played like absolute trash in Game 6, shooting 6 for 20 and letting Hakeem score a hyper efficient 30 points. In fact, even though most people blame Starks for sucking in Game 7, no one mentions that Starks carried them in Game 6 with an efficient 27/8/2. If Ewing plays well in that game, the Knicks close it out in six. But instead he choked and then backed that up with another subpar performance in Game 7.

sixers247
08-18-2014, 03:28 PM
Just to be clear the 4 or 5 dupe votes for Ewing wont count right haha.

sixers247
08-18-2014, 03:37 PM
F you, you live in a rat hole city.. currupt bs philly. You should be shot.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Get a life buddy, signing up time after time to spew your idiotic rants that make no sense after you get banned time and time again is entertaining to me but shows your said existence of life in your moms basement.

Dade County
08-18-2014, 04:50 PM
Everyone vote for Wade!

Don't let your HEAT or Lbj hate get in the way of WOW.

No_Sympathy
08-18-2014, 05:00 PM
I find it funny that everybody uses rings to defend Kobe, but when its D Wade, that logic is thrown out the window.

3 rings with a finals MVP. Could of easily had 4 rings with 2 Finals MVP if Lebron didn't choke. Dwyane Wade gets my vote! He should of been higher IMO.

Raidaz4Life
08-18-2014, 05:36 PM
I still don't see how anyone can warrant picking a player with 5 seasons over 70 games in the top 25. His prime was spectacular but he has no longevity argument whatsoever

unleashthebeast
08-18-2014, 05:44 PM
So I'm assuming the Dupe votes dont count for Ewing, meaning Wade is up

Spurswins
08-18-2014, 05:45 PM
I find it funny that everybody uses rings to defend Kobe, but when its D Wade, that logic is thrown out the window.

3 rings with a finals MVP. Could of easily had 4 rings with 2 Finals MVP if Lebron didn't choke. Dwyane Wade gets my vote! He should of been higher IMO.

Could of easily been 1 ring with 4 Finals loses. They all sucked in the 13 Finals. Allen bailed them all out.
The Refs bailed he and Riley out in 06. So 1 real ring with Lebron for 4 years, Even had the best center in the NBA for three seasons.

Spurswins
08-18-2014, 05:47 PM
So I'm assuming the Dupe votes dont count for Ewing, meaning Wade is up


I was sort of thinking the same thing, but some were dupilcate wade votes as well.

Spurswins
08-18-2014, 05:52 PM
Secondly, why is it not fair to judge Ewing for his horrible postseason numbers in that series, but not look at the flip side and see how well Olajuwon performed in that series? Hakeem completely dominated in that series in spite of how good new York's defense was, posting 27/9/4/4/2 on 50% shooting. If Hakeem can post great numbers in the Finals against a great defensive center and defensive team, why can't Ewing?

And finally, you're just wrong that Ewing "did play well in forcing a game 7." The Knicks already had a 3-2 lead and Ewing played like absolute trash in Game 6, shooting 6 for 20 and letting Hakeem score a hyper efficient 30 points. In fact, even though most people blame Starks for sucking in Game 7, no one mentions that Starks carried them in Game 6 with an efficient 27/8/2. If Ewing plays well in that game, the Knicks close it out in six. But instead he choked and then backed that up with another subpar performance in Game 7.



Why are you putting so much emphasis on his matchup with Hakeem, I mean did Dwyane Wade do better vs against Hakeem or something, I don't find the connection? You're trying to compare apples and oranges. Also if you watched those Finals, you'll remember that Mason was usually guarding Hakeem any way.

Shammyguy3
08-18-2014, 05:55 PM
I still don't see how anyone can warrant picking a player with 5 seasons over 70 games in the top 25. His prime was spectacular but he has no longevity argument whatsoever

I don't see why we have to use 70 games as a barometer checkpoint. I mean look at Shaq: played 19 seasons in the league and only played over 70 games 7 times (this isn't to say that Shaq didn't prove his longevity, don't misconstrue this post ---> it's only in regards towards your 70 game thing). He only reached that 70-game mark 37% of his career. Wade on the other hand has reached it 45% of the time.

The longevity argument can be applied, and that's why some people may pick Havlicek or Stockton etc over Wade. But I don't really see using this 70 game thing as a valid argument (especially since Wade missed that mark by one game in another of his seasons, so why not use 69 then?)

Spurswins
08-18-2014, 06:01 PM
I don't see why we have to use 70 games as a barometer checkpoint. I mean look at Shaq: played 19 seasons in the league and only played over 70 games 7 times (this isn't to say that Shaq didn't prove his longevity, don't misconstrue this post ---> it's only in regards towards your 70 game thing). He only reached that 70-game mark 37% of his career. Wade on the other hand has reached it 45% of the time.

The longevity argument can be applied, and that's why some people may pick Havlicek or Stockton etc over Wade. But I don't really see using this 70 game thing as a valid argument (especially since Wade missed that mark by one game in another of his seasons, so why not use 69 then?)

Wade has played about 700 games, It just doesn't stack up against an all time great center that played in 1200 games. Ewing also has like 10,000 more points and 7,000 more rebounds.

Shammyguy3
08-18-2014, 06:39 PM
Wade has played about 700 games, It just doesn't stack up against an all time great center that played in 1200 games. Ewing also has like 10,000 more points and 7,000 more rebounds.

But Ewing ****ing SUCKED in the playoffs the majority of the time. Wade stepped up his game the majority of the time. I don't see how there's seriously any case for Ewing going ahead of Wade, Havlicek, Pippen, Stockton, McHale, and perhaps a couple more.

If this was a longevity only award based on career total raw numbers, then yea Ewing would be great! But it's not that, not at all

NYKalltheway
08-18-2014, 07:00 PM
Numbers are a huge, huge part of the argument, but they're hardly the only part.

It seems like numbers and "accolades", which are both affected by team play but no one seems to be able to grasp that, are the only thing that matter to you(plural).


Who has the greater individual accolades? Wade.

Irrelevant.


Who has the greater postseason production? Wade.

Irrelevant. Faced different teams and played a different game(different rules etc)


Who played in and won more titles? Wade.

Irrelevant. See above.


Who had the bigger, more memorable individual performances? Wade.

If you're comparing him with John Starks then yes. If you're comparing him with Patrick Ewing, I'd actually have a look at Ewing's best games and reconsider. Wade is no slouch but don't portray him as some divine player that came to save us from the post-Jordan era :D


Who was (by far) the better and more skilled offensive player? Wade.

Are you seriously getting into this one? A 7ft center who could shoot from pretty much anywhere with good % for a man of that size, occassionally drive, dunk and who was one of the best defensive bigs of the toughest generation of centers is "by far" worse and less skilled than a flashy guard? Surely Wade is a very talented player but you are acting as if you're comparing him to Mutombo or Longley here...



I don't care what criteria you use to judge basketball players. Dwyane Wade was clearly the better player in his prime and has probably already had a superior career despite playing in far fewer games.

That's your opinion and it seems clouded by the fact that you know who Wade is but don't know who Ewing or anyone else before him was. And by the fact that your criteria is messed up and has no logical flow in it.
Seriously, in a court of law, your claim that Wade is better than Ewing would be laughed off and no appeal could have been allowed. That does not mean that there cannot be any argument that Wade has been a superior player to Ewing, but if the only case is what you're referring to, then it's simply not the case. Almost none of your criteria are basketball related. Most are media related. And that says a lot. Not just about you, but about the last 2-3 generations of basketball fans in the USA.

ManRam
08-18-2014, 07:31 PM
Dupe votes won't count.

mightybosstone
08-18-2014, 07:32 PM
It seems like numbers and "accolades", which are both affected by team play but no one seems to be able to grasp that, are the only thing that matter to you(plural).
What else are we supposed to use to judge players, then? If you're relying solely on the eye test, then how are you suppose to judge athletes who played before you were every born? Numbers, accolades and context are the only objective ways to judge players who came before us.


Irrelevant.

Irrelevant. Faced different teams and played a different game(different rules etc)

Irrelevant. See above.
You can scream "irrelevant" from the top of your lungs, but that doesn't make it true. It makes you incompetent. If you don't look at numbers or accolades to judge a player, then you're not judging players fairly. If you can't understand this concept, maybe you shouldn't be arguing sports in the first place. :shrug:


If you're comparing him with John Starks then yes. If you're comparing him with Patrick Ewing, I'd actually have a look at Ewing's best games and reconsider. Wade is no slouch but don't portray him as some divine player that came to save us from the post-Jordan era
Ewing might have had a number of big performances, but nothing he did could ever top Wade's performance in the '06 Finals in terms of significance. It was probably one of the 5-10 greatest individual Finals performances in the history of the league.


Are you seriously getting into this one? A 7ft center who could shoot from pretty much anywhere with good % for a man of that size, occassionally drive, dunk and who was one of the best defensive bigs of the toughest generation of centers is "by far" worse and less skilled than a flashy guard? Surely Wade is a very talented player but you are acting as if you're comparing him to Mutombo or Longley here...
Offensively? Yes, I do think he was that much better. In the 20 years that I've been watching NBA basketball, there are only a handful of players that I've seen that could score at the rate and the efficiency that Wade did in his prime. And going a step further, very few players I've ever watched could score in the variety of ways that Wade did. I've seen that many make more circus shots and get more and-one attempts than any player I can recall from that time period.

Also you mention "defensive bigs" but I never brought up defense in this conversation, because I don't think Wade was a better defensive player than Ewing. Not remotely. But Wade's advantage offensively and in terms of clutch play is far greater than Ewing's advantage on the defensive end.


That's your opinion and it seems clouded by the fact that you know who Wade is but don't know who Ewing or anyone else before him was.
The very first basketball game I ever cared about was Game 6 of the 1994 NBA Finals. I was 7 years old, and that was the first time I ever paid attention to a sporting event for more than 30 seconds at a time. So you can take everything with a grain of salt, because most of my watching of Ewing's career was from the perspective of a child. But I saw the guy play, and I was never intimidated by him or the Knicks. Young MBT loathed and was terrified of guys like Jordan, Robinson, Barkley and Malone. But never Ewing, because I always knew Hakeem could get the better of him. The numbers and accolades and context I can pull up and study today only back up all of the things I felt about Ewing from the time I first saw him play until the time he retired.


And by the fact that your criteria is messed up and has no logical flow in it.
What the **** are you talking about? My criteria is the same criteria that everyone else uses. It's no less logical than any other criteria used by any other poster or basketball analyst. Also, for someone who criticizes so much, I have yet to see you bring a single piece of relevant criteria to the table. All you do is talk about how talented he was, but how is that an argument? If talent alone was the sole criteria for this list, it would look very, very different. It's not about how much talent you have or what you can do with your basketball when you're at your best. It's about how productive, how consistent and how clutch you were while playing the game of basketball. Wade was more productive and far more clutch than Patrick Ewing. Period.


Seriously, in a court of law, your claim that Wade is better than Ewing would be laughed off and no appeal could have been allowed. That does not mean that there cannot be any argument that Wade has been a superior player to Ewing, but if the only case is what you're referring to, then it's simply not the case. Almost none of your criteria are basketball related. Most are media related. And that says a lot. Not just about you, but about the last 2-3 generations of basketball fans in the USA.
Again, quit criticizing my criteria and actually formulate an opinion of your own. You haven't proven a single thing I've said wrong and you haven't proven a single thing about Ewing right. I deal in stats, facts and truths. You deal in vague generalities based on your memories of a player that are 20+ years old.

As for where my opinions of Ewing come from, I'm not basing it on media whatsoever. I don't need Bill Simmons to tell me that Ewing wasn't clutch. I saw Ewing fail first hand, and anybody with a basic knowledge of simple statistics can see that without having to read any articles or novels. That's just your go-to crutch when you have no leg to stand on. Instead of having a legitimate argument based on facts or legitimate criteria, you criticize the criteria by which people use to judge players, call everyone stupid and then blame the media for misinforming NBA fans. It's pathetic. Either come up with an actual argument or just stop. No one is impressed, and you're not swaying anyone's opinion.

mngopher35
08-18-2014, 07:35 PM
Manram are you looking at the votes and weeding out the duplicates?

There are 3 hunterdunks voting for ewing all of which I think joined psd today.

There are 3 shawnkemp accounts and a todd wilkerson (who prabably made those 3 accounts above too). So 7 votes from likely 1 person and it could be 8 once spurswins reveals himself...

Wade should be winning based on real voting.

EDIT: Ha you beat me to it. Thanks.

WaDe03
08-18-2014, 07:55 PM
Yea spurswin is more than likely Tod. This dude has nothing better to do with his life.

Goose17
08-18-2014, 08:13 PM
This is just ugly.

ManRam
08-18-2014, 08:17 PM
Just to clarify, we agree that the following are dupes:

Hunterdunks10, Hunterdunks11, Hunterdunks12, Kempisback, Kemptostay, TWilkinsonisbac, ShawnKemp

Correct? Anyone I miss?

Spurswins is highly suspicious and since he joined today and all he cares about is this I think it's safe to assume that as well.

I didn't want to implement a minimum posts qualifier because it wasn't a problem the last time...but maybe I should have. If this becomes a problem again I will implement it, unless there are objections.

JustinTime
08-18-2014, 08:35 PM
Based on what? Because any decent statistical criteria you use to judge players says prime James absolutely demolishes prime Kobe. Don't just say "player x > player y all day" and then not have anything to back it up with.

Based on the fact that a prime Kobe could win titles with much worse teams.

Dade County
08-18-2014, 08:39 PM
Just to clarify, we agree that the following are dupes:

Hunterdunks10, Hunterdunks11, Hunterdunks12, Kempisback, Kemptostay, TWilkinsonisbac, ShawnKemp

Correct? Anyone I miss?

Spurswins is highly suspicious and since he joined today and all he cares about is this I think it's safe to assume that as well.

I didn't want to implement a minimum posts qualifier because it wasn't a problem the last time...but maybe I should have. If this becomes a problem again I will implement it, unless there are objections.

If Wade doesn't win this, start the voting over between Ewing & Wade only.

Shammyguy3
08-18-2014, 08:40 PM
Hunterdunks13 will seal the deal on this :Laugh2:

ThuglifeJ
08-18-2014, 10:52 PM
Can I just ask why my nomination hasn't happened yet? What is the requirements here.

JAZZNC
08-18-2014, 11:18 PM
No, try to dig up some of it. See if you can find a 28/11/4 block season. Believe Me, Duncan is a great player and is still the number 1 player in the League that GM's that want to win would pick first today.

Ewing in his prime could POST, Could hit free throws, and could go out to 20 feet and drill jumpers.

He was 7 feet 250 pounds with a 7'6 wingspan and a 35 inch vertical leap and understood the game.
No one in their right mind would pick Wade over Ewing when starting a team.
Ok, lets look at their postseason careers, you know....that time when it matter.

Ewing-20.2/10.3/2.2/2/46.9% with a PER of 19.6 and a ws/48 of .130
Zero titles in one try.

Duncan-21.3/11.7/2.3/3.1/50% with a PER of 24.6 and ws/48 of .196
Five titles in six tries. Three Finals MVPs and unbelievable performances like 21/20/8/10 in the closout game against the Nets or 31/16/3 in a closeout game against the Suns. Know what I remember from Ewing and closeout games? A missed layup, that's right a blown lay up to win the game.

So where again is Ewing close to Duncan? Seriously try and prove a valid point without bringing up one season and the used up "only player with these certain stats in a yr".

mightybosstone
08-19-2014, 09:10 AM
Ugh... I'm stunned there were that many dupe accounts voting for Ewing. The worst part about it is that this is going to keep happening until he wins a poll. I don't even know if I would have him in my top 30. I've got at least 5-7 guys on that board that I'd pick over him.

sixers247
08-19-2014, 09:17 AM
Ugh... I'm stunned there were that many dupe accounts voting for Ewing. The worst part about it is that this is going to keep happening until he wins a poll. I don't even know if I would have him in my top 30. I've got at least 5-7 guys on that board that I'd pick over him.

Agreed, I think Manram should put a post minimum, is it possible lol, of like 500 so the dupes can't skew any voting.

On to the next vote, i am hard pressed not to vote for Baylor. I think it is his time. THen Hav, Stockton, Gervin, Mchale will get my attention.

ManRam
08-19-2014, 09:51 AM
Can I just ask why my nomination hasn't happened yet? What is the requirements here.

There are none. You're on my ignore list so when I search for nominations I don't see yours. Sorry. Chronz quoted you so we're good now. He'll be on the next poll.

sixers247
08-19-2014, 09:54 AM
There are none. You're on my ignore list so when I search for nominations I don't see yours. Sorry. Chronz quoted you so we're good now. He'll be on the next poll.


http://s3.amazonaws.com/rapgenius/michael-jordan-laughing.gif

NYKalltheway
08-19-2014, 10:33 AM
Ok, lets look at their postseason careers, you know....that time when it matter.

Ewing-20.2/10.3/2.2/2/46.9% with a PER of 19.6 and a ws/48 of .130
Zero titles in one try.

Duncan-21.3/11.7/2.3/3.1/50% with a PER of 24.6 and ws/48 of .196
Five titles in six tries. Three Finals MVPs and unbelievable performances like 21/20/8/10 in the closout game against the Nets or 31/16/3 in a closeout game against the Suns. Know what I remember from Ewing and closeout games? A missed layup, that's right a blown lay up to win the game.

So where again is Ewing close to Duncan? Seriously try and prove a valid point without bringing up one season and the used up "only player with these certain stats in a yr".


You see MBT.. this is not basketball talk.

A (naive) basketball argument would be "you fed the ball to player x in the paint and there was no way to stop him. He could go left, right or straight to the basket, hit it from range or take it to the bank" etc... And then you show videos of the players you're comparing... and naming their matchups in each situation. There are more technical ways of analyzing basketball players. I've worked as a scout and know how these things are done. Stats are irrelevant. A coach might ask for a player that simply runs up and down and forces the opponent's best team to choke. You can get that player to hit 10-12 pts a game and he might end up being your most important player while others score 25-30ppg... Basketall is all about context. Focusing on numbers means you don't really watch the game. If you really watched the game and knew where a player should be and what he should be doing on the court, numbers are the last thing that would matter to you.

AND THEN... and ONLY THEN, one is allowed to come up with stats, but not your traditional stats. A coach needs to see which zones are better for his shooter, how challenging the rebounds his F or C is grabbing, how many turnovers are unforced or due to miscommunication rather than bad passing/handling and that kind of stuff.

Comparing PERs and PPGs is like comparing watch brands(I'm quite fanatical about watches btw). They all show the time but some are more expensive than others. An expensive watch doesn't mean it's better than a cheaper watch. IT depends what you're looking for. Comparing random stats is the definition of NO IDEA WTF I'M LOOKING AT BUT THESE LOOK BETTER THAN THE OTHER ONES...


P.S: Sorry, Jazznc, not personal at all, you just made a post at the wrong time at the right place :D

mightybosstone
08-19-2014, 12:08 PM
A (naive) basketball argument would be "you fed the ball to player x in the paint and there was no way to stop him. He could go left, right or straight to the basket, hit it from range or take it to the bank" etc... And then you show videos of the players you're comparing... and naming their matchups in each situation. There are more technical ways of analyzing basketball players. I've worked as a scout and know how these things are done.
But that's where you're totally wrong. You're assuming that the most skilled or talented player is always the most productive or successful player, but that's hardly ever the case.


Stats are irrelevant.
And this is where you completely go off the deep end. If stats were irrelevant, then the majority of professional sports teams would not be utilizing more advanced statistics in their front offices and we wouldn't be seeing those teams be successful. Except they are being implemented across the league and those teams have been extremely successful.

Sports are an art form in many ways, but as is the case with most things in life and business, they ultimately boil down to numbers. I don't care if a team was the most skilled, I care if they scored the most points and won the game. I don't care if a player has the most post moves or the prettiest jump shot, I care if they performed well in the biggest games of their career and if they were consistently scoring at an efficient pace.

That's your problem. You're studying basketball like it's an art form, but that's just not how 99% of fans and analysts view the sport.


A coach might ask for a player that simply runs up and down and forces the opponent's best team to choke. You can get that player to hit 10-12 pts a game and he might end up being your most important player while others score 25-30ppg.
Name one team in the entire league right now where a 10-12 PPG game is more important than the 25-30 PPG guy. That simply isn't true.


Basketall is all about context.Focusing on numbers means you don't really watch the game. If you really watched the game and knew where a player should be and what he should be doing on the court, numbers are the last thing that would matter to you.
Again you're wrong. You're assuming that people who use numbers don't watch the sport. Of course we watch the sport. Why the **** would I have 23,000 posts on an Internet sports forum if I didn't watch and love sports? I can make an opinion of a player by watching him on the court and seeing what he does well and does poorly. Statistics just help reinforce what you're already watching and help to make sense of a player's tendencies over a long period of time. I don't need stats to tell me that Josh Smith is a chucker who takes way too many 3-pointers for a player with no range on his jumper. But the stats help me compare just how bad he is with other players.


AND THEN... and ONLY THEN, one is allowed to come up with stats, but not your traditional stats. A coach needs to see which zones are better for his shooter, how challenging the rebounds his F or C is grabbing, how many turnovers are unforced or due to miscommunication rather than bad passing/handling and that kind of stuff.
But we're not coaches or scouts. We're not picking players to stick within certain systems or to play a certain role. We're taking a blanket approach of "who is the best player of all-time still left on the board?" That's why you need numbers.


Comparing PERs and PPGs is like comparing watch brands(I'm quite fanatical about watches btw). They all show the time but some are more expensive than others. An expensive watch doesn't mean it's better than a cheaper watch. IT depends what you're looking for. Comparing random stats is the definition of NO IDEA WTF I'M LOOKING AT BUT THESE LOOK BETTER THAN THE OTHER ONES...
It's not at all like comparing watch brands, because all watches essentially do the same thing basically just as well as every other watch. Basketball players do not all play basketball as well as every other player. Sure, some watches might have different features and some may be made of nicer material, but they ultimately all do the same exact thing.

When you're looking at statistics, you just have to be able to provide context for the numbers. You have to consider the sample size, the era, the competition, the position they play, the minutes they're getting, etc. For example, I could tell you that Charlie Scott averaged 33.4 points per game in 1971-72 and you might consider that impressive. But 73 of his 79 games were in the ABA and he took 29 shots per game just to get those 33 points. That's not impressive. Or I could tell you that Vern Mikkelsen posted a ridiculous .270 WS/48 in 1951-52. But he played in a league prior to the induction of a shot clock, it was only 1-2 years after black players were allowed in the NBA and he only scored 16 points per game on 41.9% shooting. Definitely not that impressive.

You assume everyone is looking at blanket numbers and using those numbers as the sole reasoning for their vote. That's simply not the case. We're looking at EVERYTHING. It's not just the PPG or the PER. It's the all-around game, the accolades, the postseason production, who they played, their biggest success and failures in the postseason and everything else. That's how you judge players objectively. You don't just look at a player and say "that guy had the best turn around jumper I've ever seen, therefore he should be ranked higher." That's ridiculous.

Chronz
08-19-2014, 12:23 PM
Ok, lets look at their postseason careers, you know....that time when it matter.

Ewing-20.2/10.3/2.2/2/46.9% with a PER of 19.6 and a ws/48 of .130
Zero titles in one try.

Duncan-21.3/11.7/2.3/3.1/50% with a PER of 24.6 and ws/48 of .196
Five titles in six tries. Three Finals MVPs and unbelievable performances like 21/20/8/10 in the closout game against the Nets or 31/16/3 in a closeout game against the Suns. Know what I remember from Ewing and closeout games? A missed layup, that's right a blown lay up to win the game.

So where again is Ewing close to Duncan? Seriously try and prove a valid point without bringing up one season and the used up "only player with these certain stats in a yr".

Well said.

LakersEaglesLA
08-19-2014, 12:48 PM
I know I'm late to the party but how in the Hell could LeBron James be ahead of Larry Bird and Kobe Bryant? Smh

NYKalltheway
08-19-2014, 12:50 PM
When you're looking at statistics, you just have to be able to provide context for the numbers. You have to consider the sample size, the era, the competition, the position they play, the minutes they're getting, etc.

Then explain how Lebron is #8, Kobe #10 and Wade #22....

You're not able to provide context for the numbers, that's the problem. You just look at numbers. No one has ever factored the game changes.

Everyone is too busy saying how crap the ABA years were but now that the NBA has become the ABA (from 2005 and on), you're overrating these players but consider others who were ABA stars to be trash!
If Lebron is a top 10 guy, then Billy freaking Cunningham must be top 5. But that's not the case and it'll never be.

When you learn what 'context' means, you'll be able to read basketball stats. For the time being, just mentioning accolades and measuring some "advanced stats" is not helping anyone. It actually irritates basketball fans and even scouts.

Ask any scout around, the number one thing they look at players is THEIR PLAYING CHARACTERISTICS. A scout attends a game to watch a player. He doesn't care about his stat line. He might be interested in that later on, but he needs to watch a player 3-5-10 times before that.... That's how you judge basketball players. By watching. Most people don't have a good understanding of that though so they say "stats"... I get that. They want to play along. Not being able to play a sport you like, you have to find a way to keep you interested in it. Following it and acting as if you know all the ropes there is to the game is part of the gig. That's why we have so many "stat nerds", because they felt it was their way into basketball. I'm sorry to disappoint you but that's not the case.

LakersEaglesLA
08-19-2014, 01:02 PM
Then explain how Lebron is #8, Kobe #10 and Wade #22....

You're not able to provide context for the numbers, that's the problem. You just look at numbers. No one has ever factored the game changes.

Everyone is too busy saying how crap the ABA years were but now that the NBA has become the ABA (from 2005 and on), you're overrating these players but consider others who were ABA stars to be trash!
If Lebron is a top 10 guy, then Billy freaking Cunningham must be top 5. But that's not the case and it'll never be.

When you learn what 'context' means, you'll be able to read basketball stats. For the time being, just mentioning accolades and measuring some "advanced stats" is not helping anyone. It actually irritates basketball fans and even scouts.

Ask any scout around, the number one thing they look at players is THEIR PLAYING CHARACTERISTICS. A scout attends a game to watch a player. He doesn't care about his stat line. He might be interested in that later on, but he needs to watch a player 3-5-10 times before that.... That's how you judge basketball players. By watching. Most people don't have a good understanding of that though so they say "stats"... I get that. They want to play along. Not being able to play a sport you like, you have to find a way to keep you interested in it. Following it and acting as if you know all the ropes there is to the game is part of the gig. That's why we have so many "stat nerds", because they felt it was their way into basketball. I'm sorry to disappoint you but that's not the case.

THANK YOU! Everything you said was the TRUTH and nothing but the TRUTH.. You restored my hope that real sports fans and former athletes are still out there

mightybosstone
08-19-2014, 01:56 PM
Then explain how Lebron is #8, Kobe #10 and Wade #22....

You're not able to provide context for the numbers, that's the problem. You just look at numbers. No one has ever factored the game changes.
You keep saying "context," but what the **** are you actually talking about? You're just speaking in generalities with no examples or detail to back up anything you say. If you want me to take you seriously and stop laughing at your posts, then actually say something of value and provide evidence to back up what you're saying.


Everyone is too busy saying how crap the ABA years were but now that the NBA has become the ABA (from 2005 and on), you're overrating these players but consider others who were ABA stars to be trash!
If Lebron is a top 10 guy, then Billy freaking Cunningham must be top 5. But that's not the case and it'll never be.
What? Since when are the ABA and today's league similar at all? I get that you're comparing playing styles but you're missing the HUGE variable that was the talent of the ABA. Today's NBA is a million times more talented than the ABA at its peak, and if you can't understand that, you probably shouldn't be arguing basketball. You should be focusing on staying inside the lines while playing with children's coloring books.


When you learn what 'context' means, you'll be able to read basketball stats. For the time being, just mentioning accolades and measuring some "advanced stats" is not helping anyone. It actually irritates basketball fans and even scouts.
No sir. YOU don't understand what context means. You just compared today's league to the freaking ABA as if that was a legitimate point.


Ask any scout around, the number one thing they look at players is THEIR PLAYING CHARACTERISTICS. A scout attends a game to watch a player. He doesn't care about his stat line. He might be interested in that later on, but he needs to watch a player 3-5-10 times before that.... That's how you judge basketball players. By watching. Most people don't have a good understanding of that though so they say "stats"... I get that. They want to play along. Not being able to play a sport you like, you have to find a way to keep you interested in it. Following it and acting as if you know all the ropes there is to the game is part of the gig. That's why we have so many "stat nerds", because they felt it was their way into basketball. I'm sorry to disappoint you but that's not the case.
You're still not getting it, dude. I have no clue how someone can be so dense, but I'll try to simplify it even more....

This is not a list of the players with the greatest playing characteristics. It's a list for the greatest players with the greatest careers. Talent and skill does not equal production. You're just not comprehending this very simple fact, and until you do you're going to continue to have a drastic misunderstanding of how these lists work. If you want to be ignorant, that's your prerogative. I can't stop you.

LakersEaglesLA
08-19-2014, 02:36 PM
You keep saying "context," but what the **** are you actually talking about? You're just speaking in generalities with no examples or detail to back up anything you say. If you want me to take you seriously and stop laughing at your posts, then actually say something of value and provide evidence to back up what you're saying.


What? Since when are the ABA and today's league similar at all? I get that you're comparing playing styles but you're missing the HUGE variable that was the talent of the ABA. Today's NBA is a million times more talented than the ABA at its peak, and if you can't understand that, you probably shouldn't be arguing basketball. You should be focusing on staying inside the lines while playing with children's coloring books.


No sir. YOU don't understand what context means. You just compared today's league to the freaking ABA as if that was a legitimate point.


You're still not getting it, dude. I have no clue how someone can be so dense, but I'll try to simplify it even more....

This is not a list of the players with the greatest playing characteristics. It's a list for the greatest players with the greatest careers. Talent and skill does not equal production. You're just not comprehending this very simple fact, and until you do you're going to continue to have a drastic misunderstanding of how these lists work. If you want to be ignorant, that's your prerogative. I can't stop you.

You got owned by this guy, stop arguing your making it worse on yourself. You will Never understand because you don't know the game. Another stat geek lol you guys are annoying. Stat geeks are fixated on the surface of basketball (the obvious stats) but have no clue as to the Other variables of basketball.

mightybosstone
08-19-2014, 02:41 PM
You got owned by this guy, stop arguing your making it worse on yourself. You will Never understand because you don't know the game. Another stat geek lol you guys are annoying. Stat geeks are fixated on the surface of basketball (the obvious stats) but have no clue as to the Other variables of basketball.
You clearly haven't read anything that I've said. I could have written 1,000 words, but the second I mention WS or PER a single time, you're one of the guys who immediately screams "Stat geek!" and completely ignores the other 999 words. If you're not going to take the time to read everything a person types and take it all into consideration, then I have no reason to respect you or take you seriously.

LakersEaglesLA
08-19-2014, 02:52 PM
[QUOTE=mightybosstone;28945459]You clearly haven't read anything that I've said. I could have written 1,000 words, but the second I mention WS or PER a single time, you're one of the guys who immediately screams "Stat geek!" and completely ignores the other 999 words. If you're not going to take the time to read everything a person types and take it all into consideration, then I have no reason to respect you or take you seriously.[/QUO


I have read the post and his examples of how to judge players are Right and 90% of psd's posters of how to judge players are Wrong. Simple and plain NO gray area

Chronz
08-19-2014, 03:17 PM
I have read the post and his examples of how to judge players are Right and 90% of psd's posters of how to judge players are Wrong. Simple and plain NO gray area

Whered you get this stat from lol

NYKalltheway
08-19-2014, 09:06 PM
No sir. YOU don't understand what context means. You just compared today's league to the freaking ABA as if that was a legitimate point.


Won't bother with the rest as it's a result of frustration since from your reply what I get is that you have no clue of what I just said to you...

But the modern NBA is exactly like the ABA. If anything, the only competition we can compare the modern NBA game to is the ABA. The NBA in between was a different game and does not deserve to be compared with it. Only difference is that the modern NBA has influences from the older generations plus it has a lot of foreigners (who still require time to adapt to the sissy rules of the modern game so they're not performing at 100% in many cases). We have a league where most players don't have fundamental skills. And you're here arguing with numbers for crying out loud!

This "all time list" is filled with superstars of the modern NBA game and many from the previous generation. That means two things.
a) people are too biased for the modern era and have limited knowledge of the older game.
b) people act as if the NBA is a league that started in 1980 and anything before that was not basketball.

And it's tiring when people want to discuss basketball that random stat lines are thrown around by others who want to sound like experts.

FlashBolt
08-19-2014, 10:48 PM
Won't bother with the rest as it's a result of frustration since from your reply what I get is that you have no clue of what I just said to you...

But the modern NBA is exactly like the ABA. If anything, the only competition we can compare the modern NBA game to is the ABA. The NBA in between was a different game and does not deserve to be compared with it. Only difference is that the modern NBA has influences from the older generations plus it has a lot of foreigners (who still require time to adapt to the sissy rules of the modern game so they're not performing at 100% in many cases). We have a league where most players don't have fundamental skills. And you're here arguing with numbers for crying out loud!

This "all time list" is filled with superstars of the modern NBA game and many from the previous generation. That means two things.
a) people are too biased for the modern era and have limited knowledge of the older game.
b) people act as if the NBA is a league that started in 1980 and anything before that was not basketball.

And it's tiring when people want to discuss basketball that random stat lines are thrown around by others who want to sound like experts.

I'm sorry but do you think athletes were just as good during ABA as they are now? That is just absurd. It's without a doubt that athletes are better now than ever. It's not even something you can't prematurely say and argue. It's obvious to the naked eye that it is true. I don't understand your zealot arguments via competition. What exactly are you talking about? Can you provide examples of this or are you just going to spew random words with no proof of your comparisons? We get that NBA isn't as fundamentally strong as it used to be but you wanna know why? More and more players rely on athleticism and quite frankly, that's often enough to get past the hump. So what are you saying? Fundamental players are the best? Duncan is the doctor of fundamentals. Are you saying he's better than Jordan - someone who predominantly relied on athleticism? Here's the thing, numbers back up production. Ever hear the saying, "Numbers don't lie"? Because they don't. The reason college numbers are irrelevant and why it was a bad example from you was because college to NBA is a huge transition. But in NBA, let's use James as an example. 10 years of accomplishments, statistics, and whatever eye test you use is ENOUGH to warrant his numbers as proof. If it were one year, sure. But we're talking about consistent dominance in every facet of the game.

1) Basketball in the 1980's was not remotely as competitive as it is now; nor was it half as popular. Your argument is full of crap. You're basically saying modern players aren't as great as older players because older players are older? That's nostalgia for ya.

2) Look at the list. Only 7 players can actually be considered modern. Those seven players include: Kobe, Duncan, Dirk, Wade, LeBron, Garnett, Shaq. Shaq, Dirk, Garnett, Duncan, and Kobe are a given. They DESERVE to be a lock on this list. Wade/LeBron have had shorter stints but yet why is Larry Bird allowed to be on this list when he realistically only had 11 seasons under his belt - the same as Wade/James? These are ALL PROVEN players. The majority of PSD VOTED them in. It wasn't like the minority won the vote. We all have different opinions but it was a democracy. A fair vote and more people disagreed than agreed with you. Stop crying about it.


On a side note, I always find that the people who absolutely hate using statistics and always encourage the eye test of approval, are the people who support players who's statistics are decent but not legendary. Don't you find that a coincidence? What was Kobe's best year? 2005-2006. What year did he post the highest PER/WS? 2005-2006. Stats is just a tool but more often than not, it is the most important tool.

Additionally, I want you to find a player who isn't statistically strong and tell me you'd rather have him than the strong statistical players such as James, KD, or Love. No really, go find one and risk your "eye test" on it. Do you know why companies pay accountants and CEO's millions of dollars? Because they can't just look at something and do business. They need the numbers to back up their statements. NBA is the exact same thing. Numbers back up their contract. Do you see 10 PPG, 3 RPG, and 2 APG getting paid max contract? Wonder why?

FlashBolt
08-19-2014, 10:55 PM
[QUOTE=mightybosstone;28945459]You clearly haven't read anything that I've said. I could have written 1,000 words, but the second I mention WS or PER a single time, you're one of the guys who immediately screams "Stat geek!" and completely ignores the other 999 words. If you're not going to take the time to read everything a person types and take it all into consideration, then I have no reason to respect you or take you seriously.[/QUO


I have read the post and his examples of how to judge players are Right and 90% of psd's posters of how to judge players are Wrong. Simple and plain NO gray area

So.. you just said stats don't mean as much but you just used a stat to prove your argument. You do realize how stupid that sounds, right? Btw, if you want to use the eye test, can you provide some examples? You can't. Because when you watch a player, what they do is going to be recorded into something called their statistics. So either way you want to establish your argument, statistics are involved in everything; not just basketball. EVERYTHING. Stat geeks? More like people who can find proof to disable your petty eye arguments.

This post was directed to LakersEaglesLA. Not you, mighty.

NYKalltheway
08-20-2014, 06:04 AM
FlashBolt, you need to reconnect with planet Earth. I'm sorry that I have to sound so arrogant but what you're saying can't be treated as an argument.

The players you mention do not deserve to be a lock. No one does. If Lebron is a lock, then Baylor must be a lock too. If Kobe is a lock, then Drexler must be a lock too. It doesn't work that way.

The 80s are what made the NBA the popular league it is today. It's now more accessible to watch the NBA, it's not better and it's not "more reputable". There probably are more people who used to watch the NBA and no longer do than those who watch it regularly these days.

Basketball is not baseball. Numbers don't matter.

Obviously you need a star player who can score, but it's a 5 on 5 game, not a pitcher vs batter and if he hits, a defensive team, 1st base, 2nd base or whatever they call them in baseball... Basketball is a team sport. You need 5 players and a deep bench.
Having 5 star players on a team means that at least 3 of them will have their "stats" reduced. Does that make them inferior players?
Having 1 star player on a crap team playing against a team with 3-4 star players usually means that "statistically", he'll outperfom them. Does that make him a better player?

I've not seen a single soul on this website to be able to argue basketball using statistics. All I see is numbers thrown away. I can argue basketball with or without statistics. I was being paid to recruit players a couple of years ago at a local team and we won the championship. Stats were irrelevant. It's all about winning. You need to be able to pick the 'winner' out of the lot. Stats don't show winners.

A fan cannot talk about stats in most cases. He doesn't know it. Stick to (pl.) "ZOMG look at that dunk" because that's what most are able to do. Understand how great a player is based on how he gets the ball to the basket. Stats are rarely used in the way that PSD members use them and historical player comparison among basketball experts is never based on personal accolades, all-star appearances, all-NBA appearances and that kind of stuf.

Can you tell me why Lebron is better than Elgin Baylor and why Kobe Bryant is better than Clyde Drexler? I'd appreciate a basketball discussion. You're free to transfer this question to the ongoing poll ( #23).