PDA

View Full Version : ESPN's Top 10 Power Forwards All Time



tredigs
01-15-2016, 04:56 PM
"To create All-Time #NBArank, we put together a ballot with the 150 greatest players ever, with voting based on both peak performance and career value. Then our ESPN expert panel voted on thousands of head-to-head matchups, resulting in an all-time NBA Top 100."

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/page/nbarankPFs/ranking-greatest-power-forwards-nba-history

10: Dennis Rodman

He's the answer to what happens when a smart and talented player dedicates himself to one aspect of the game. Rodman led the league in rebounding average an unprecedented seven consecutive years. -- J.A. Adande, ESPN.com

9: Pau Gasol

Gasol might be the most skilled big man of his era; he could use his right or left hand in the post, shoot the elbow jumper, and pass the ball. -- Adams

8: Elvin Hayes:

A 20-and-10 guy for each of the first 12 years of his career, Hayes never missed more than two games in a season. -- Adande

7: Bob Pettit:

Centers and guards were the scorers in his day. Power forwards grabbed boards. Pettit was one of the first to do both extremely well, never averaging less than 24.6 point per game or 12.4 rebounds per game in a season. -- Peterson

6: Kevin McHale:

Guarding McHale in the post was aptly referred to as "The Torture Chamber." -- Adams

5: Kevin Garnett:

There are only a few players who can state that they were at one time the best player in the world, and Garnett is on that list. One of the most versatile and intense players ever. -- Doolittle

4: Charles Barkley:

He was so dominant in the paint, but also a flat-out great shooter inside the arc. The numbers absolutely love him because of his efficiency. -- Doolittle

3: Dirk Nowitzki:

Undoubtedly the best European player in NBA history -- and there haven't been that many better players born in America either. -- Pelton

2: Karl Malone

He is the only player in NBA history to be named First-Team All-NBA in 11 consecutive seasons. -- Adams

1: Tim Duncan:

Duncan is this generation's answer to Bill Russell. Fundamentals, consistency, quiet excellence and winning above all else; Duncan embodies everything basketball should be about. -- Doolittle

Hawkeye15
01-15-2016, 05:03 PM
I don't even feel like re-hashing the debate, but I have:

1- Dunca
2a- Barkley
2b- KG
4- Malone
5- Dirk

but, whatever. I am not going to kill the list.

kdspurman
01-15-2016, 05:07 PM
I don't even feel like re-hashing the debate, but I have:

1- Dunca
2a- Barkley
2b- KG
4- Malone
5- Dirk

but, whatever. I am not going to kill the list.

Yea, this is probably more how mine would look too.

mngopher35
01-15-2016, 05:14 PM
I don't even feel like re-hashing the debate, but I have:

1- Dunca
2a- Barkley
2b- KG
4- Malone
5- Dirk

but, whatever. I am not going to kill the list.

I would move Dirk over Malone too, I generally see him as last between these guys. It's close between the group though so everyone will have differing opinions based on what they prefer I guess.

ewing
01-15-2016, 05:20 PM
I don't care about guys i never saw play i move KG behind Gasol and McHale

flea
01-15-2016, 05:26 PM
I'd put Worthy over Rodman and I'd consider Webber over him too. Since they're putting active players in, why the Bosh hate? I think he's definitely got an argument at the bottom of this list too.

YAALREADYKNO
01-15-2016, 05:40 PM
Dirk should be 2nd and webber should be on the list ahead of rodman

tredigs
01-15-2016, 05:51 PM
I'd put Worthy over Rodman and I'd consider Webber over him too. Since they're putting active players in, why the Bosh hate? I think he's definitely got an argument at the bottom of this list too.

"Bosh hate"?

Worthy's considered a SF and on that list.

valade16
01-15-2016, 06:06 PM
Redrum, Malone #2 and Dirk #3. I win :) jk

leprechaun5
01-15-2016, 06:26 PM
1.Duncan
2.KG
3.Dirk
4.Barkley
5.Malone
/caseclosed

Hawkeye15
01-15-2016, 06:36 PM
Yea, this is probably more how mine would look too.

god please take your sig down haha, I can't stand watching my team get completely abused over and over again

LOb0
01-15-2016, 06:41 PM
1. Duncan
2. Barkley
3. Dirk
4. KG
5. Malone

The separation for Dirk and KG was that Dirk wanted the ball late, KG wasn't that guy, he was forced into that role in Minnesota but his real role was defensive anchor and second scoring option. Dirk had one of the best playoff runs of all time beating Kobe/Gasol Westbrook/Durant and Wade/Bosh/Bron.

ewing
01-15-2016, 06:48 PM
Where's Charles Oakley?

Hawkeye15
01-15-2016, 07:01 PM
Where's Charles Oakley?

prolly sitting at a playground in NY with a orthopedic chair for his back and a 40

tredigs
01-15-2016, 07:31 PM
prolly sitting at a playground in NY with a orthopedic chair for his back and a 40

:laugh:

Co-sign that! Definitely not on a top 10 All-Time PF list.

flea
01-15-2016, 08:02 PM
Lol, at least Oak knows how to live.

valade16
01-15-2016, 08:04 PM
:laugh:

Co-sign that! Definitely not on a top 10 All-Time PF list.

But if we're making a list of top NBA goons, he'd be right up there.

lavell12
01-15-2016, 08:08 PM
I think you guys are really underestimating Malone. He is clearly the second behind Duncan.

tredigs
01-15-2016, 08:21 PM
I think you guys are really underestimating Malone. He is clearly the second behind Duncan.

Malone takes the cake by being consistently great for so long, but if I had to take either in their prime it's Barkley and I'm not thinking twice. Faster, better ball handler and a more dominant passer/rebounder/scorer and just a freakin' ball of awesome.

PatsSoxKnicks
01-15-2016, 11:00 PM
I'd take Dirk over Malone. But admittedly a bit biased.

bagwell368
01-15-2016, 11:33 PM
KG is too low. Anyone remember Malone's shrinkage factor in the playoffs? Like that they gave McHale some respect, many of these lists don't have him on.

I just can't put Hayes into my top 10. To many J's.

Duncan
KG

Dirk - not enough D to be higher
Charles - ditto
Malone (.205 WS/48 in reg season; .140 in playoffs)
McHale - short career

the remainder

YAALREADYKNO
01-16-2016, 01:06 AM
KG is too low. Anyone remember Malone's shrinkage factor in the playoffs? Like that they gave McHale some respect, many of these lists don't have him on.

I just can't put Hayes into my top 10. To many J's.

Duncan
KG

Dirk - not enough D to be higher
Charles - ditto
Malone (.205 WS/48 in reg season; .140 in playoffs)
McHale - short career

the remainder

Lmao at the reason why Dirk can't be higher. I guess clutch play and playoff play isn't a factor when it comes to KG

Raps18-19 Champ
01-16-2016, 01:08 AM
Lol top 3 is easily Duncan, KG, Dirk.

tredigs
01-16-2016, 01:16 AM
Nothing "lol easy" about rating those two above Malone or Barkley. The 2-5 is pretty interchangeable depending on your criteria.

YAALREADYKNO
01-16-2016, 01:21 AM
Nothing "lol easy" about rating those two above Malone or Barkley. The 2-5 is pretty interchangeable depending on your criteria.

It's ok I have a friend who ranks Rasheed Wallace above Barkley and Malone 😂😂😂

JasonJohnHorn
01-16-2016, 01:47 AM
I'd put Worthy over Rodman and I'd consider Webber over him too. Since they're putting active players in, why the Bosh hate? I think he's definitely got an argument at the bottom of this list too.

Webber perhaps.... Worthy.... not worthy.

Rodman was a historic player in terms of what he excelled at. Worthy was just lucky to be drafted into a dynasty. Besides, I always say him as a SF, though he played both.

Now had Danny Manning been drafted by the Lakers, and Worthy by the Clippers, which of the two do you think we'd be talking about in this context?

ewing
01-16-2016, 08:14 AM
Lmao at the reason why Dirk can't be higher. I guess clutch play and playoff play isn't a factor when it comes to KG

Didi't you know that once people came to grips with the fact that KG wasn't even a #1 option on a championship level team they started pretending he was Bill Russell on D?

ewing
01-16-2016, 09:45 AM
Webber perhaps.... Worthy.... not worthy.

Rodman was a historic player in terms of what he excelled at. Worthy was just lucky to be drafted into a dynasty. Besides, I always say him as a SF, though he played both.

i co-sign this post and Wayne's World references.

valade16
01-16-2016, 11:48 AM
Didi't you know that once people came to grips with the fact that KG wasn't even a #1 option on a championship level team they started pretending he was Bill Russell on D?

He did win DPOY in 04-05. Whether he was Bill Russell or not he was light years ahead of Dirk defensively.

ewing
01-16-2016, 12:55 PM
He did win DPOY in 04-05. Whether he was Bill Russell or not he was light years ahead of Dirk defensively.

he was very good defensive player but not Ben Wallace or Hakeem good. I dont think you can rank a 2nd option who disappears offensively when it matter as the 2nd best PF of all time b/c he was an elite cog on D. Is Pippen better then Bird? (btw i don't think KG is as good a defensive 4 as Pip was a 3 but even if you did)

flea
01-16-2016, 01:23 PM
Webber perhaps.... Worthy.... not worthy.

Rodman was a historic player in terms of what he excelled at. Worthy was just lucky to be drafted into a dynasty. Besides, I always say him as a SF, though he played both.

Now had Danny Manning been drafted by the Lakers, and Worthy by the Clippers, which of the two do you think we'd be talking about in this context?

Rodman is so overrated around here. He was a great role player don't get me wrong, but it's not like your team was going to be anything with him as your best player. I don't see how he's much different in impact from Marcus Camby - maybe a little better because of versatility but then Camby was a shotblocker.

Worthy though, probably the most athletic PF of his day and would still be today. Also had some of the best low-post moves, good midrange shot, and a was a pretty good defender in spite of being below average on the glass for a PF. He was the Lakers's primary halfcourt option after Kareem was relegated to total role player. If you're putting McHale so high then he's definitely around there. Not quite as good as McHale but close enough in overall impact and was derailed early by injuries. He's a rich man's Blake Griffin.

Manning on the other hand, without knee injuries who knows how we think of him. Probably at least on the level of King and Aguirre, and maybe all the way up to Wilkins and Paul Pierce. None as good as Worthy, who gets the short end because of how good his teams were (largely because of him, mind you, since the Lakers fast break was predicated on his speed and athleticism).

SLY WILLIAMS
01-16-2016, 01:56 PM
1. Duncan
2. Mchale
3. Barkley
4. Dirk
5. Malone

ewing
01-16-2016, 02:03 PM
Rodman is so overrated around here. He was a great role player don't get me wrong, but it's not like your team was going to be anything with him as your best player. I don't see how he's much different in impact from Marcus Camby - maybe a little better because of versatility but then Camby was a shotblocker.

Worthy though, probably the most athletic PF of his day and would still be today. Also had some of the best low-post moves, good midrange shot, and a was a pretty good defender in spite of being below average on the glass for a PF. He was the Lakers's primary halfcourt option after Kareem was relegated to total role player. If you're putting McHale so high then he's definitely around there. Not quite as good as McHale but close enough in overall impact and was derailed early by injuries. He's a rich man's Blake Griffin.

Manning on the other hand, without knee injuries who knows how we think of him. Probably at least on the level of King and Aguirre, and maybe all the way up to Wilkins and Paul Pierce. None as good as Worthy, who gets the short end because of how good his teams were (largely because of him, mind you, since the Lakers fast break was predicated on his speed and athleticism).


i agree with your assessment on Rodman. He was a great role player but he was never has impactful Lamibeer was for the Pistons and i prefer Horce as my PF on the Bulls, though i admit that is debatable. If on his 2 signature teams he had less value then Bill Lamibeer and equal or slightly more value then Horce Grant how is he a top 10 PF of all time? He was unique on and off the floor and we probably will never see another but i don't think that justifies his ranking all time.

basch152
01-16-2016, 02:04 PM
It's a tragedy how little defense is valued.

A player that is great offensively but TERRIBLE defensively is rated above very good offensive, and elite defensive players.

It's just awful.

kdspurman
01-16-2016, 02:08 PM
god please take your sig down haha, I can't stand watching my team get completely abused over and over again

They actually defended it pretty well, you should be proud :)

But that many passes in such a short amount of time will make any team exhausted

flea
01-16-2016, 02:28 PM
It's a tragedy how little defense is valued.

A player that is great offensively but TERRIBLE defensively is rated above very good offensive, and elite defensive players.

It's just awful.

Nobody in this top 10 list is terrible defensively.

mngopher35
01-16-2016, 02:35 PM
I am not sure where people stand with KG and his offense exactly but I agree it wasn't 1st option level like a Dirk. I do think he could be considered the top offensive player on a well rounded offense while also being the best defender on the court though (capable of being leader at both ends). Offensively I think he is somewhat comparable to Duncan actually in his prime. If we take a 10 year sample (99-08 for KG, Duncan was harder I went with 02-10 just because it might have dropped him adding another year on either end).

Per 100 Possessions

KG: 30.2 pts, 6.6 ast, 3.8 oreb, 3.7 TOV, 112 ORTG

Duncan: 31.5 pts, 5ast, 4.5 oreb, 3.8 TOV, 111 ORTG


Now before anyone starts thinking I mean anything different I am simply comparing their offensive prime numbers over those regular seasons (aka playoffs the advantage would shift toward Duncan easily and Duncan was the better defender). If we consider the talent around Duncan and the differences in offenses (Wolves long 2's which shows with KG, Pop being a great offensive and all around coach) I think it is fair to say that KG had a more difficult situation as well while arguably having better numbers over this time although close. So I am not sure where people stand when they say he's a second option but I think he can be thought of somewhat similarly to Duncan on that end. Now again not as good because he wasn't as good in the playoffs/clutch but these are times where coaching, help, and game planning come into play a bit more which IMO hurts KG.

To be fair and show playoffs their number over 10 year prime (again 99-08 for KG, 01-09 for Duncan, weird again and his sample is bigger anyways).

Per 100 possessions

KG:30.2 pts, 5.9 ast, 3.6 oreb, 3.9 tov, 106 ORTG

Duncan: 32.3 pts, 5.1 ast, 4.9 oreb, 4.2 tov, 110 ORTG

So Duncan clearly has the advantage here. Overall though I think it is pretty clear that even though KG wasn't quite as good, given his circumstances and similarities in production, calling KG a second option yet Duncan clearly a first option is kinda a stretch (especially considering both were a 1st option putting up these numbers). Again he isn't quite as good (on either end) as Duncan but we are talking about a top 5 player ever and KG isn't that far off in his production with clearly worse circumstances. Also KG did lead that Boston title team in ppg during the playoffs while clearly being the best defender which was their teams strength (overall that post-season similar production offensively to Peirce but slightly better ORTG). So I think KG was capable of leading a solid team offense while dominating defensively.

flea
01-16-2016, 02:41 PM
If you don't think Duncan is a 1st option then you didn't watch the Spurs prior to 2008. He was as good as they come offensively for big men, especially when he had his prime mobility. He was the entirety of the Spurs offense for a good 5 year stretch. If you want to make KG sound like a better offensive scorer maybe aim a little lower, like Malone or Gasol.

mngopher35
01-16-2016, 02:47 PM
I think Duncan is definitely a first option (I believe I even said he clearly was lol). I'll also repeat that I never said KG was better than Duncan just compared their production and then I still said he wasn't as good overall.

flea
01-16-2016, 02:59 PM
Oh I think I misread. I don't know about this 'first option' stuff but I think people mean best offensive player on his team when they say that. KG could and was that on winning teams IMO but I think you need high-end guard play and a more all-around offensive team for it to lead to lots of postseason victories.

The difference is their low-post and at the rim production, where elite scorers do most of their damage. Duncan takes almost 70% of his shots inside 10 feet in his prime and converts at elite levels. KG takes like 40-45% of his shots there and converts at good but not remarkable levels. Late in games or on possessions to stop a run, you want shots close to the rim and not contested 18 footers. That is still true in today's game IMO though I recognize Curry is an exception a lot of the time. Doesn't mean every team should run their offense as though they had Curry on it.

mngopher35
01-16-2016, 03:05 PM
Ok now that post I agree with flea. Kg took a lot more shots from range but as I stated (and even watching wolves today there are similarities) that is our offensive design (long 2's which sucks). The reasons you mention are why I still think Duncan was better though.

As you said he needed a more well rounded offense than a dirk would for sure but he could play a similar role to Duncan as a first option (just a bit worse).

ewing
01-16-2016, 04:53 PM
ahhh... give up the ghost

DboneG
01-16-2016, 05:58 PM
ESPN's Top 10

1: Tim Duncan..........If you don't have anything good to say, don't say anything!
2: Karl Malone..........This guy did everything a Power Forward was supposed to do!
3: Dirk Nowitzki.......Please! Bit on the soft side...more of a stretch forward to me.
4: Charles Barkley....This guy was awesome!
5: Kevin Garnett.......Skinny dude played tough day in and day out!
6: Kevin McHale........Just an awesome game!
7: Bob Pettit .............Didn't know his game....just his numbers.
8: Elvin Hayes...........If you needed a rebound the Big E would get it! A true Power Forward!
9: Pau Gasol..............Please!!! This guy is soft! He's not a Top 25!
10: Dennis Rodman...Totally awesome player. He could even score early in his career.




DboneG's Top 10

1. Karl Malone........A true Power Forward! Ran better than Timmie, and scored better than him.
2. Tim Duncan.........He got the job done. I can't argue with his production.
3. Charles Barkley...You couldn't stop his offensive game, could rebound.
4. Kevin Garnett...... I'll take him over Dirk any day of the week. Strong inside presence.
5. Kevin McHale ......Played the game the way it was supposed to be played. True PF.
6. Elvin Hayes .........Great rebounder! Very good scorer, tough inside, a true Power Forward.
7. Dennis Rodman....One of the best defenders, great rebounder!
8. Chris Weber .........A scorer, rebounder, passer, tough inside, leader. Everything!
9. Shawn Kemp .......Awesome player! That could do everything well.
10. Bob Pettit ..........Old school player. You just argue with his numbers.

Chronz
01-16-2016, 07:07 PM
Rodman is so overrated around here. He was a great role player don't get me wrong, but it's not like your team was going to be anything with him as your best player.
I think Rodman was the kind of guy who prevented your team from ever being bad, the x factor that pushed elite teams over the top. He was to Detroit and arguably Chicago what Draymond is to his Warriors in a sense that their impact on the outcome of the game for their teams far exceed their individual production. Draymond is most definitely an elite player even if others have superior stats, same with Rodman. Look at the records of his team in games he played and didn't play, its a shocking turn around vs their record with him, particularly in his prime. What kills his legacy is that sometimes those games missed were self inflicted and the fiasco in San Antonio.

Like do you consider an Antoine Walker to be a better player? Who could arguably "lead" a bad team better than Rodman?


I don't see how he's much different in impact from Marcus Camby - maybe a little better because of versatility but then Camby was a shotblocker.
Camby was an opportunistic stat accumulator, similar to Rodman I suppose (especially in the days when he stopped defending to simply chase rebounds, aka San Antonio days) but his impact in his prime, he was a LEGIT DPOY. He could and would guard everyone at any position, theres been alot of versatile defender. Like Bron could guard a center like Camby and people make a big deal about it, but a guy like Rodman could guard anyone at a high level. Camby isn't in his league in terms of that kind of influence, his teams were arguably more defensively sound when they replaced him with the K-Mart/Nene duo, those guys relied more on body positioning than the gambling Camby did. His DPOY was a farce and I've been wanting to make a thread on it for some time now.

Chronz
01-16-2016, 07:11 PM
Id rather have Rodman on my team than Elvin Hayes any day. The advantage I have with Rodman on my team is something thats irreplaceable. You can always find a comparable scorer to Hayes, you will never find a comparable rebounder/defender at his peak.

flea
01-16-2016, 08:12 PM
I think Rodman was the kind of guy who prevented your team from ever being bad, the x factor that pushed elite teams over the top. He was to Detroit and arguably Chicago what Draymond is to his Warriors in a sense that their impact on the outcome of the game for their teams far exceed their individual production. Draymond is most definitely an elite player even if others have superior stats, same with Rodman. Look at the records of his team in games he played and didn't play, its a shocking turn around vs their record with him, particularly in his prime. What kills his legacy is that sometimes those games missed were self inflicted and the fiasco in San Antonio.

Like do you consider an Antoine Walker to be a better player? Who could arguably "lead" a bad team better than Rodman?


Camby was an opportunistic stat accumulator, similar to Rodman I suppose (especially in the days when he stopped defending to simply chase rebounds, aka San Antonio days) but his impact in his prime, he was a LEGIT DPOY. He could and would guard everyone at any position, theres been alot of versatile defender. Like Bron could guard a center like Camby and people make a big deal about it, but a guy like Rodman could guard anyone at a high level. Camby isn't in his league in terms of that kind of influence, his teams were arguably more defensively sound when they replaced him with the K-Mart/Nene duo, those guys relied more on body positioning than the gambling Camby did. His DPOY was a farce and I've been wanting to make a thread on it for some time now.

I disagree Camby was overrated. He was one of the better defenders of his era. Once he came around, the Knicks remained good defensively in spite of an uninspiring cast. When he left they went back to useless. He helped the Nuggets stay good defensively with zeros like Miller and Melo taking up space. Yeah Nene/KMart were good players too but I think Camby was easily better than both (defensively) before he declined.

Camby's stats speak for themselves - one of the best rebounders and shotblockers of his generation, advanced stats to back it up (similar BPM to other elite role players like Rodman and Battier), and wasn't a playoff dud in spite of reputation. He just sucked offensively. I think someone else should have won DPOY, probably Duncan like most years in the 00s, but he wasn't a bad choice.

Rodman, on the other hand, is vastly overrated as a perimeter guy. Pippen would give him fits while he was still in his prime athletically, and the Spurs did nothing but lie down vs. the Jazz p&r attack with Malone. Yes he was a great defender, and yes one of the more versatile, but he was no Pippen, Cooper, MJ or even Marion on the perimeter IMO. A lot of his defensive value was tied to his boards. He was the 4th or 5th best player on the stacked Bad Boys, important yes but about as important as Byron Scott was to the Lakers dynasty. Then when he became a high minute guy he ran himself out of town, took a dump in SA, and ended up with a storybook end to his career on the already stacked Bulls.

All else equal, I certainly don't take a low IQ idiot like Walker over him but a good scorer and competent all-around forward like Pierce, Worthy, and even the guy whose starting job he took Aguirre - certainly. This is to start a franchise. Hell even someone like a focused Lamar Odom I would take over Rodman (no I'm not saying Odom had a better career).

ewing
01-16-2016, 09:13 PM
Id rather have Rodman on my team than Elvin Hayes any day. The advantage I have with Rodman on my team is something thats irreplaceable. You can always find a comparable scorer to Hayes, you will never find a comparable rebounder/defender at his peak.

like i said he was extremely unique but at what point are you overrating that. Was he more valuable then Bill Lamibeer? was he a lot better the Horce Grant who was also an elite defender but was also multi-faceted?

FlashBolt
01-17-2016, 04:04 PM
Dirk/KG/Malone/Barkley are all interchangeable. This myth that one was light years above another is just pathetic. My personal list has Duncan>KG>Dirk>Barkley>Malone.

DavidGrant
01-17-2016, 04:16 PM
Dirk/KG/Malone/Barkley are all interchangeable. This myth that one was light years above another is just pathetic. My personal list has Duncan>KG>Dirk>Barkley>Malone.

Pretty Sure that Barkley was better than Garnett. Go back and look at the numbers.

DavidGrant
01-17-2016, 04:19 PM
like i said he was extremely unique but at what point are you overrating that. Was he more valuable then Bill Lamibeer? was he a lot better the Horce Grant who was also an elite defender but was also multi-faceted?

Elvin Hayes and Rodman were both great players. but I think Elvin was a little better and that's saying a lot. In Elvin's day he was a 24/14/4block player. now the block shot is one of the best stats in the game. not only does it erase points from the other teams total, but it causes the other team to game plan around it and by doing that it changes countless other shots.

DavidGrant
01-17-2016, 06:53 PM
Rodman is so overrated around here. He was a great role player don't get me wrong, but it's not like your team was going to be anything with him as your best player. I don't see how he's much different in impact from Marcus Camby - maybe a little better because of versatility but then Camby was a shotblocker.

Worthy though, probably the most athletic PF of his day and would still be today. Also had some of the best low-post moves, good midrange shot, and a was a pretty good defender in spite of being below average on the glass for a PF. He was the Lakers's primary halfcourt option after Kareem was relegated to total role player. If you're putting McHale so high then he's definitely around there. Not quite as good as McHale but close enough in overall impact and was derailed early by injuries. He's a rich man's Blake Griffin.

Manning on the other hand, without knee injuries who knows how we think of him. Probably at least on the level of King and Aguirre, and maybe all the way up to Wilkins and Paul Pierce. None as good as Worthy, who gets the short end because of how good his teams were (largely because of him, mind you, since the Lakers fast break was predicated on his speed and athleticism).

Worthy is a Small Forward all the way man. Rambis, AC, Cupchek, McAdoo, and Perkins were the PF's.
Also the most athletic PF ever is either Darryl Dawkins or Shawn Kemp both of which are underated by the hood rat kids on this site. They only look at Career stats. Well guess what, Career Stats don't tell you very much. They don't tell you how a player played and what kind of impact they had.

Rodman was one of the top defensive players ever and his offense was near the top of the league in this way, He added about 6 more possessions for your team or shots. He won 5 Rings as the third best player on all 5 Championship teams. I think he's somewhere in the mix around 9-12.

DavidGrant
01-17-2016, 07:04 PM
The PF debates are the best. I like to look at strength, athleticism, team play, winning ability, primes, entertainment factor, offense and defense, I also really like the PF to be able to beat everyone down the court to finish fast breaks.

80% Prime
10% longevity
10% accolades

Barkley
Duncan
Kemp
Malone
Hayes
Garnett
Nowitzki
McAdoo
McHale
Webber
Dawkins
Rodman
Larry Johnson
Anthony Mason

PF is the best position to talk about.

flea
01-17-2016, 07:14 PM
Worthy is a Small Forward all the way man. Rambis, AC, Cupchek, McAdoo, and Perkins were the PF's.

The goal of the Showtime Lakers was speed, transition, and mismatches when it wasn't about Kareem. Worthy played PF most of his minutes in the heyday of the Showtime Lakers even if they'd start with 2 bigs plus Worthy because the mismatch was too good to pass up. It was like Lebron on the Heat - he was basically a PF who sometimes played next to and started with another PF. But the goal of those teams was to create mismatches in transition, and for Worthy to use his elite first step on the block. It wasn't until Kareem was a role player that defensive and rebounding liabilities became too much to justify the classic Showtime small lineups.

You can call him and Bird both PFs and SFs, it doesn't really matter in that era. Cornermen were about like wings are today, highly interchangeable depending on matchup. They spent probably a roughly equal amount of time as both in their careers.

And as for your list lol, I'll go ahead and say it's one of the more creative I've seen.

DavidGrant
01-17-2016, 07:22 PM
Worthy wasn't a PF in the 80's. He was a SF. He never started a game at PF. Also never averaged over 7 rebounds. He's more suited to the SF especially back then in the 80's. I know what you're talking about, but he'd only play PF from like 87-90 and it was only with the bench team for about 10 minutes a game. You're only half way right. The Lakers also wanted him in the post matched up with another SF because Worthy was 6'9 long arms and big hands and could score in the post on any SF in the NBA. He was pretty athletic too.

He's known as a SF even if you think you would play him at PF. For the exercise all his basketball cards and everything always said SF if it specified between the two. Now Bird, he could really play PF or SF. Because he was more rugged and a much better rebounder and interior defender

you're robot, you base your list on the other little hood rats list and copy them. You don't know how to base it on Athleticism, wins added, defense and things like that.

I base mine on WINS per season and SOS. That's is how all real rankings are ranked in all sports since the beginning.

flea
01-17-2016, 08:01 PM
W/e bro, he played both and was regarded as the fastest PF in the game in the mid-80s. 87-90 was when he played with bigger frontcourts because Kareem was declined and AC Green offered hustle. Prior to him it was a midget Rambis and old McAdoo (who was basically the same size but less athletic as Worthy) trying to provide frontcourt depth. They were a running team without much big depth, that's why Magic spent a lot of time as a frontcourt player.

Munkeysuit
01-18-2016, 08:16 AM
Totally agree with ESPN's list on this one.

YAALREADYKNO
01-18-2016, 04:48 PM
Ehh to me worthy is known as a SF so I'll put him in that category

Chronz
01-19-2016, 03:05 PM
like i said he was extremely unique but at what point are you overrating that. Was he more valuable then Bill Lamibeer? was he a lot better the Horce Grant who was also an elite defender but was also multi-faceted?
I think Rodman has a case against any Piston save for Isiah, Grant had an underrated career and was the better Bull, but he didn't have the career nor was he as gifted as young Rodman IMO.



I disagree Camby was overrated. He was one of the better defenders of his era.
Hardly, at his apex he was arguably the 2nd or 3rd best defensive bigman on his own team in Denver and sometimes their 4th best defender in the post. Theres a reason he never took on the task of defending the best bigs, he was relatively frail and easily pushed around. Yes, he was taken off the ball so that he could provide the help but he was still outclassed 1v1 so Im not going to buy your complaint about Rodman allegedly struggling with anyone, he was the kind of guy who gave legends fits, I dont see anywhere near the same level of respect from coaches/players about how Camby defended them.

Caution, Subjective Breakdown: Camby's PnR defense was mediocre because all he ever wanted was for guys to challenge him at the rim so he could chase blocks and rebounds and in his youth he was over aggressive and committed too many dumb fouls (remember the Finals). Its why his teams in Denver didn't really drop off in any defensive category without him, he was basically stealing rebounds the team would have missed anyways. If we had the stats back then, Im almost positive his rim protection and contested rebounding numbers would expose his somewhat inflated stats. Solid defender, a guy capable of anchoring good but not great defenses with a mediocre cast. Never on the level of a guy like Rodman who was the difference maker from a good defense to a Historic one, a great defense to below league average. Just an entirely different level of defensive impact.



Once he came around, the Knicks remained good defensively in spite of an uninspiring cast. When he left they went back to useless. He helped the Nuggets stay good defensively with zeros like Miller and Melo taking up space. Yeah Nene/KMart were good players too but I think Camby was easily better than both (defensively) before he declined.

Camby's stats speak for themselves - one of the best rebounders and shotblockers of his generation, advanced stats to back it up (similar BPM to other elite role players like Rodman and Battier), and wasn't a playoff dud in spite of reputation. He just sucked offensively. I think someone else should have won DPOY, probably Duncan like most years in the 00s, but he wasn't a bad choice.

Rodman, on the other hand, is vastly overrated as a perimeter guy. Pippen would give him fits while he was still in his prime athletically, and the Spurs did nothing but lie down vs. the Jazz p&r attack with Malone. Yes he was a great defender, and yes one of the more versatile, but he was no Pippen, Cooper, MJ or even Marion on the perimeter IMO. A lot of his defensive value was tied to his boards. He was the 4th or 5th best player on the stacked Bad Boys, important yes but about as important as Byron Scott was to the Lakers dynasty. Then when he became a high minute guy he ran himself out of town, took a dump in SA, and ended up with a storybook end to his career on the already stacked Bulls.
Gonna try to address most of your points, but my main complaint is that you underrate the effectiveness of Rodman's 1v1 defense by calling out whatever matchup you believe yet ignore the fact that Camby was ducking the opposing teams best BIG(much less their best player at any position) at every stop in his career. Remember poor old Larry Johnson defending a young Tim Duncan in the Finals, he only got to rest whenever Camby got into foul trouble because at least then Dudley would help defend Duncan. Camby avoided Duncan again in Denver whenever I saw them(Albeit to a lesser degree), the task was left to the bruising Nene or tougher K-Mart (whichever wasn't hurt). Camby couldn't take the banging, he was a good defender, NEVER great.

Since he won his DPOY with Denver so Im assuming you feel those were his peak years, if you're a Knicks fan then I can see why we would have different perspectives on him. I saw plenty of NY games back then but nothing like the last few years, so his most recent years are what I remember the most. As for his stats, he had high blks and d-reb numbers, but his individual D was weak, opposing teams/bigs weren't stunted by his presence and he often hid from the best matchups from what I remember, certainly not clamping down guys like Larry Bird and Karl Malone (with Chicago) and even matching up with the likes of Shaq and holding it down. The Nuggets were able to survive without Camby (they might've even improved defensively from what I remember) because his pretty stats belied his true impact, he wasn't that big of a game changer, sorta like a younger DeAndre Jordan but not to that extreme. His impact stats (+/- analysis) isn't as favorable to him as you would think from what it says about other historically great defenders. Ill try to get the quotes and numbers but Rodman transformed teams at his apex.



All else equal, I certainly don't take a low IQ idiot like Walker over him but a good scorer and competent all-around forward like Pierce, Worthy, and even the guy whose starting job he took Aguirre - certainly. This is to start a franchise. Hell even someone like a focused Lamar Odom I would take over Rodman (no I'm not saying Odom had a better career).

I only agreed with Pierce/Worthy, dont see their teams suffering as much as Rodman's teams did without him.

Tony_Starks
01-19-2016, 04:12 PM
McHale is top 3. He is basically the blueprint of fundamental post game.

Rodman should also be WAY higher. Dude was pivotal in 5 rings and a rebounding machine. He's a huge reason #2 Karl Malone is ringless today.

flea
01-21-2016, 09:52 PM
Hardly, at his apex he was arguably the 2nd or 3rd best defensive bigman on his own team in Denver and sometimes their 4th best defender in the post. Theres a reason he never took on the task of defending the best bigs, he was relatively frail and easily pushed around. Yes, he was taken off the ball so that he could provide the help but he was still outclassed 1v1 so Im not going to buy your complaint about Rodman allegedly struggling with anyone, he was the kind of guy who gave legends fits, I dont see anywhere near the same level of respect from coaches/players about how Camby defended them.

I won't disagree that Camby was more slight, but he was ultra-athletic and would have given a lot of teams fits that people write about had he played with MJ instead of Carmelo. He's top 10 for his career on both the total rebound % list and block % list. That's all time, and while he didn't have an extremely long career by any means he played almost the exact number of regular season minutes that Rodman did (who was a 6th man playing 30 minutes and less for much of the time he's remembered for).


Caution, Subjective Breakdown: Camby's PnR defense was mediocre because all he ever wanted was for guys to challenge him at the rim so he could chase blocks and rebounds and in his youth he was over aggressive and committed too many dumb fouls (remember the Finals). Its why his teams in Denver didn't really drop off in any defensive category without him, he was basically stealing rebounds the team would have missed anyways. If we had the stats back then, Im almost positive his rim protection and contested rebounding numbers would expose his somewhat inflated stats. Solid defender, a guy capable of anchoring good but not great defenses with a mediocre cast. Never on the level of a guy like Rodman who was the difference maker from a good defense to a Historic one, a great defense to below league average. Just an entirely different level of defensive impact.



Gonna try to address most of your points, but my main complaint is that you underrate the effectiveness of Rodman's 1v1 defense by calling out whatever matchup you believe yet ignore the fact that Camby was ducking the opposing teams best BIG(much less their best player at any position) at every stop in his career. Remember poor old Larry Johnson defending a young Tim Duncan in the Finals, he only got to rest whenever Camby got into foul trouble because at least then Dudley would help defend Duncan. Camby avoided Duncan again in Denver whenever I saw them(Albeit to a lesser degree), the task was left to the bruising Nene or tougher K-Mart (whichever wasn't hurt). Camby couldn't take the banging, he was a good defender, NEVER great.

Since he won his DPOY with Denver so Im assuming you feel those were his peak years, if you're a Knicks fan then I can see why we would have different perspectives on him. I saw plenty of NY games back then but nothing like the last few years, so his most recent years are what I remember the most. As for his stats, he had high blks and d-reb numbers, but his individual D was weak, opposing teams/bigs weren't stunted by his presence and he often hid from the best matchups from what I remember, certainly not clamping down guys like Larry Bird and Karl Malone (with Chicago) and even matching up with the likes of Shaq and holding it down. The Nuggets were able to survive without Camby (they might've even improved defensively from what I remember) because his pretty stats belied his true impact, he wasn't that big of a game changer, sorta like a younger DeAndre Jordan but not to that extreme. His impact stats (+/- analysis) isn't as favorable to him as you would think from what it says about other historically great defenders. Ill try to get the quotes and numbers but Rodman transformed teams at his apex.

First of all, blaming Camby for not defending Tim ****ing Duncan in 1999 when he was 24 years old and hadn't started a single regular game all year isn't convincing. If you want to blame anyone for that entirely understandable loss you can blame Kurt Thomas - because although he was a fine rotational big that had a good career he was the vet backup to Ewing and he played less minutes than Camby once Ewing went down. Plus, someone had to defend Robinson too - who played the position that Camby did.

Second you way underrate his impact - statistical and in the w/l column.

Team:

Let's look his impact on W/L first. When he got traded for Dice to the Nuggets, the Knicks weren't having a great season by any stretch but they went 12-26 after the trade and continued to be terrible defensively once he was gone (bad team overall but still, he helped win games).

Then the Nuggets were good defensively for exactly one year after Camby was gone. The 2 notable change in the team other than losing Camby? Chancey Billups (one of the best defensive guards of that era) came to town and Nene was healthy again. Nene and Martin were good defensive forwards, but nothing close to Camby IMO. Their value was in being semi-competent 2-way players (unlike Camby). All those teams won with offense and running, it's rough on your team stats being an all-world defender on a team built like that (see Shawn Marion).

Stats:

Now you may subjectively say he was bad at P&R or hunted stats, but his advanced stats say otherwise and IDK how you can hunt for advanced stats like BPM. BPM has its flaws but for a guy like Camby I think it's a perfect stat - the team wasn't built around his strengths so he was the uber-role player who clearly made a difference.

From the 1999-2000 Knicks season through his last as a Nugget in 2007-2008, Camby was the leader of his team in DBPM and defensive rating every single year. He was the overall BPM leader of his team 6 times in that 9 year stretch (2nd to Nene once, 3rd to Charlie Ward and Mark Jackson once, and 2nd to Charlie Ward once). If he's overrated and was like the 3rd best defender on some of his teams, according to you, how did he manage that? Those Nuggets teams had no dearth of big men so it's not like his backups were absolute trash.

Like I also mentioned above, his career stats put him in special company (one of the best rebounders and shot blockers ever). Yes he could get bullied and yes he sucked offensively but he was definitely a high end defender and one of the best of his era. He was like a longer and more athletic Joakim Noah - who was the unheralded leader and best player of the Rose-era Bulls - who could move very well for a center and had great instincts in spite of otherwise physical limitations like size.

He actually had a higher career DBPM than Rodman (4.6 to 2.8) so IDK what other high level defenders you're taking about that were better. I don't think his superior DBPM necessarily means he was better than any of the other guys who anchored elite defenses, but I do think it means he had a role that he played extremely well.

The fact that he was a BPM for plenty of very good teams clinches it to me, you seem to have an irrational dislike for him. I guess it's because he sucked with the Clips but he was definitely an athletic defender, not a positional one. I'm not a Knicks fan and don't otherwise care about him, but I felt bad he had to cover for Melo, Miller, and Iverson for a good part of his prime.

NYKalltheway
01-21-2016, 10:19 PM
A PF has to be a two way player.

My top 15 from 5 years ago:

1: Tim Duncan
2: Kevin McHale
3: Karl Malone
4: Kevin Garnett
5: Charles Barkley
6: Bob Pettit
7: Jerry Lucas
8: Dolph Schayes
9: Chris Webber
10: Dirk Nowitzki
11: Elvin Hayes
12: Vern Mikkelsen
13: Dave DeBuscherre
14: Buck Williams
15: Maurice Lucas

Wouldn't change much from that. Only thing I can't really make my mind on is: Karl Malone vs Kevin Garnett vs Charles Barkley. Three very different PF styles, yet similar quality. I think Duncan and McHale are definite top 2 without a question.
Rodman is a hybrid SF/PF in my eyes and I'm not really sure what to rank him as. Defense and rebounds I rate higher than offense for this role, but there has to be some offense, too.

And I'm sure that a few will say that I have Dirk so low, but I'll then ask, why is Webber and Hayes so low on my own list? Dirk is probably the best offensive PF. But that's about it. He's not an all around PF and that hurts him when compared to his counterparts.

ewing
01-22-2016, 01:16 PM
I love this guys usernames- TJ Hunter. Man that kid is cool. Best college basketball since it became complete crap