PDA

View Full Version : PSD NBA All-Time Player Power Rankings: #2



HandsOnTheWheel
09-18-2017, 04:57 PM
Take into account careers (Accolades/Rings/Awards/Accomplishments) of each of the available players and take your pick

1.) Michael Jordan
2.)

Hawkeye15
09-18-2017, 05:13 PM
I have KAJ here, but I won't argue anyone that has Wilt here either.

WaDe03
09-18-2017, 05:24 PM
Kaj

dhopisthename
09-18-2017, 06:48 PM
I have KAJ here, but I won't argue anyone that has Wilt here either.

I think when you factor in longevity kareem just has so many more accomplishments over wilt.

FlashBolt
09-18-2017, 07:18 PM
KAJ beats Wilt in terms of accomplishments. if we're talking about dominance, then Shaq should be top four.. but he probably isn't on most lists.

valade16
09-18-2017, 08:01 PM
If this is the only criteria:

Accolades/Rings/Awards/Accomplishments

We've all made a mistake because the correct answer then is Bill Russell.

HandsOnTheWheel
09-18-2017, 08:21 PM
Everyone knows Russell is out the convo. It goes without saying.

FlashBolt
09-18-2017, 08:25 PM
If this is the only criteria:

Accolades/Rings/Awards/Accomplishments

We've all made a mistake because the correct answer then is Bill Russell.

Quality of rings should > quantity of rings

tredigs
09-18-2017, 09:34 PM
Everyone knows Russell is out the convo. It goes without saying.

lmfao - and why is that? On the far larger/smarter, well discussed site he is #2 or #3 in the extensive rankins I believe. What's your rationale for complete dismissal, you sage warrior you.

HandsOnTheWheel
09-18-2017, 09:40 PM
So Bill Russell would win 11 rings in today's NBA? Hmm.

HandsOnTheWheel
09-18-2017, 09:46 PM
Whats your argument for Russell btw?

HandsOnTheWheel
09-18-2017, 09:50 PM
Lol this guy. You must be well-liked around here.

HandsOnTheWheel
09-18-2017, 10:08 PM
Just to be clear I have no issue putting him in the top 10, but I'd like to hear some arguments for him.

tredigs
09-18-2017, 10:40 PM
Just to be clear I have no issue putting him in the top 10, but I'd like to hear some arguments for him.
Not sure why my comment was deleted. Soft crowd here despite no posters. That's rich.

Let's start here. What is your argument AGAINST the consensus top-10 player in history not being there? The onus is on you, not us.

Raps18-19 Champ
09-18-2017, 10:47 PM
Lebron easily.

HandsOnTheWheel
09-18-2017, 10:48 PM
I think he's arguing against himself at this point? :confused:

tredigs
09-18-2017, 10:55 PM
I think he's arguing against himself at this point? :confused:

"everyone knows russell is out of the convo - that goes without saying".

You are A) A troll (you are, clearly), and/or B) A complete dunce (you are, clearly).

Nobody even brought him up. Try not to de-rail your own thread before it dies out if you actually want a discussion. OR, actually provide some substance. Stop being an idiot.

Edit: Mods please perma-ban me so I stop responding to these ****ing idiots.

HandsOnTheWheel
09-18-2017, 11:02 PM
"everyone knows russell is out of the convo - that goes without saying".

You are A) A troll (you are, clearly), and/or B) A complete dunce (you are, clearly).

Nobody even brought him up. Try not to de-rail your own thread before it dies out if you actually want a discussion. OR, actually provide some substance. Stop being an idiot.

Edit: Mods please perma-ban me so I stop responding to these ****ing idiots.

Chill bro lol. Would you put Bill Russell at #2 all-time?

FlashBolt
09-19-2017, 12:15 AM
Lebron easily.

What has LeBron done to surpass KAJ? I'll admit, I thought about that one a bit too. For me, LeBron is probably #3 or Wilt can slide in there too. But KAJ right now? I mean, what KAJ has done overall probably isn't surpassed by even MJ. Gotta keep KAJ up there for now. I can easily see LeBron surpassing him in the future but just not right now.

HandsOnTheWheel
09-19-2017, 02:43 AM
Nvm.

YAALREADYKNO
09-19-2017, 04:34 AM
Lebron Kareem or magic

Hawkeye15
09-19-2017, 08:54 AM
Bill Russell? Outside ring count, he has zero case in the top 10, hell even 20.

valade16
09-19-2017, 11:13 AM
Bill Russell? Outside ring count, he has zero case in the top 10, hell even 20.

But you can't discount them. And he has a better case than those on here want to admit. The Celtics didn't win a title until he got there despite having MVP Bob Cousy, Bill Sherman and Ed Macauley and they won 11/13 years until Russell retires where they immediately drop to 34-48 despite having John Havlicek, Don Nelson, and Bailey Howell.

Another point for Russell is that he actually got better in the playoffs. His career PPG and RPG are 15.1 and 22.5. His playoff averages are 16.2 and 24.9 and during his peak they were actually 20.2 and 26.6. His peak TS% increased by .28 (47.4% to 50.3%).

He got better in the playoffs and led a team to 11 titles that was so stacked they couldn't win anything without him. He definitely deserves consideration.

WaDe03
09-19-2017, 11:36 AM
Bill Russell is Dennis Rodman with 11 YMCA league rings.

FlashBolt
09-19-2017, 11:59 AM
But you can't discount them. And he has a better case than those on here want to admit. The Celtics didn't win a title until he got there despite having MVP Bob Cousy, Bill Sherman and Ed Macauley and they won 11/13 years until Russell retires where they immediately drop to 34-48 despite having John Havlicek, Don Nelson, and Bailey Howell.

Another point for Russell is that he actually got better in the playoffs. His career PPG and RPG are 15.1 and 22.5. His playoff averages are 16.2 and 24.9 and during his peak they were actually 20.2 and 26.6. His peak TS% increased by .28 (47.4% to 50.3%).

He got better in the playoffs and led a team to 11 titles that was so stacked they couldn't win anything without him. He definitely deserves consideration.

They aren't being discounted in the sense that you forget about them but the totality of it is, the competition just wasn't there for it to be given so much weight. I mean, if it were 11 rings against the 80-90's centers, Bill would be the GOAT forever. But it's not. He was on what was historically great teams against teams that wouldn't be able to play at the D-League level. Two series to win an NBA Finals. 8-10 teams. I mean, it's like if the Cavs just had to go up against Boston/Pacers and they're NBA Champions.

Chronz
09-19-2017, 01:08 PM
Gimme Shaq or Wilt plz

Chronz
09-19-2017, 01:13 PM
But you can't discount them. And he has a better case than those on here want to admit. The Celtics didn't win a title until he got there despite having MVP Bob Cousy, Bill Sherman and Ed Macauley and they won 11/13 years until Russell retires where they immediately drop to 34-48 despite having John Havlicek, Don Nelson, and Bailey Howell.

Another point for Russell is that he actually got better in the playoffs. His career PPG and RPG are 15.1 and 22.5. His playoff averages are 16.2 and 24.9 and during his peak they were actually 20.2 and 26.6. His peak TS% increased by .28 (47.4% to 50.3%).

He got better in the playoffs and led a team to 11 titles that was so stacked they couldn't win anything without him. He definitely deserves consideration.
Good post. Russell has become underrated despite having a Wilt type impact only without having to monopolize the offense

Hawkeye15
09-19-2017, 03:10 PM
But you can't discount them. And he has a better case than those on here want to admit. The Celtics didn't win a title until he got there despite having MVP Bob Cousy, Bill Sherman and Ed Macauley and they won 11/13 years until Russell retires where they immediately drop to 34-48 despite having John Havlicek, Don Nelson, and Bailey Howell.

Another point for Russell is that he actually got better in the playoffs. His career PPG and RPG are 15.1 and 22.5. His playoff averages are 16.2 and 24.9 and during his peak they were actually 20.2 and 26.6. His peak TS% increased by .28 (47.4% to 50.3%).

He got better in the playoffs and led a team to 11 titles that was so stacked they couldn't win anything without him. He definitely deserves consideration.

sure I can discount them. His team had such a talent advantage for many of his titles, I can't possibly weigh them the same as winning one post merger.

His per game numbers mean nothing to me considering the pace. Fact is, the guy was a liability offensively, and we can't have a top 2, let alone top 10, greatest basketball players who sucked offensively.

No way on earth he belongs up top with the games best. His career was great, no doubt he was a monster talent, but I can't possibly put such a weak offensive player (who sucked offensively despite being surrounded by studs to make life easier) so high personally.

Russell's impact goes beyond his per game numbers, no doubt. He was the ultimate Draymond Green for instance. But he isn't the individual beast of a number of guys I will be putting ahead of him.

Hawkeye15
09-19-2017, 03:14 PM
Good post. Russell has become underrated despite having a Wilt type impact only without having to monopolize the offense

easier to have such a high level of impact when you have HOF'ers littered across your roster to take any and all pressure off your offensive shortcomings. Russell is the ultimate glue/dirty guy. Throw him on a team of ****, and what happens?

mngopher35
09-19-2017, 03:44 PM
sure I can discount them. His team had such a talent advantage for many of his titles, I can't possibly weigh them the same as winning one post merger.

His per game numbers mean nothing to me considering the pace. Fact is, the guy was a liability offensively, and we can't have a top 2, let alone top 10, greatest basketball players who sucked offensively.

No way on earth he belongs up top with the games best. His career was great, no doubt he was a monster talent, but I can't possibly put such a weak offensive player (who sucked offensively despite being surrounded by studs to make life easier) so high personally.

Russell's impact goes beyond his per game numbers, no doubt. He was the ultimate Draymond Green for instance. But he isn't the individual beast of a number of guys I will be putting ahead of him.

I agree with your take to an extent but saying he was a liability on offense is too far. He wasn't great or elite but he was definitely still a positive on that end.

With that said I am wondering who in the top 10 is close to him offensively and how big is the gap? To me offense is a bit more important than defense and he is just too far away from other all time guys to really consider him this high (or even top 5 imo). I think when we get to the bottom part of the top 10 he deserves more discussion/consideration but his lack of offensive game and the weakness (? probably not the right word) of his titles given the era and his loaded teams are definitely worth considering.

mngopher35
09-19-2017, 03:47 PM
I think I will stick with KAJ here for now.

I think Lebron/Wilt/Shaq are probably my next 3 to go after this but am not quite sure what order. Duncan/Magic might squeeze in above one of them depending on discussions but Bird/Kobe/Russell/Hakeem probably can't (these are my top 11 guys like most of you probably).

Hawkeye15
09-19-2017, 04:08 PM
I agree with your take to an extent but saying he was a liability on offense is too far. He wasn't great or elite but he was definitely still a positive on that end.

With that said I am wondering who in the top 10 is close to him offensively and how big is the gap? To me offense is a bit more important than defense and he is just too far away from other all time guys to really consider him this high (or even top 5 imo). I think when we get to the bottom part of the top 10 he deserves more discussion/consideration but his lack of offensive game and the weakness (? probably not the right word) of his titles given the era and his loaded teams are definitely worth considering.

I equate it to this-is Draymond Green really going to lead a team if asked to score, and do it efficiently? Offense is straight up more important that defense at an individual level. Was Bill Russell turning a bad team great? No, he wasn't. He was finishing the puzzle of multiple HOF'ers.

Out of the best of the very best, we have to at least be able to envision them carrying a team in any facet needed. Magic is the only other one in the top 11, and offense trumps defense, and you can have more of an impact offensively as an individual is why he rates ahead of Russell for me.

valade16
09-19-2017, 04:08 PM
easier to have such a high level of impact when you have HOF'ers littered across your roster to take any and all pressure off your offensive shortcomings. Russell is the ultimate glue/dirty guy. Throw him on a team of ****, and what happens?

This is circular logic in my opinion because the main reason so many of those guys are HOF'ers is because of all the rings they won with Russell.

No way are Tom Sanders, Don Nelson, Frank Ramsay, or KC Jones Hall of Famers without being apart of Russell's Celtics.

Bailey Howell, Tom Heinsohn and Bill Sharman would not be for sure Hall of Famers without being apart of that dynasty either.

If Russell wasn't on the Celtics they don't win near 11 titles, hell, they may have not won any and all those Hall of Famers would certainly not be all Hall of Famers.

valade16
09-19-2017, 04:11 PM
I equate it to this-is Draymond Green really going to lead a team if asked to score, and do it efficiently? Offense is straight up more important that defense at an individual level. Was Bill Russell turning a bad team great? No, he wasn't. He was finishing the puzzle of multiple HOF'ers.

Out of the best of the very best, we have to at least be able to envision them carrying a team in any facet needed. Magic is the only other one in the top 11, and offense trumps defense, and you can have more of an impact offensively as an individual is why he rates ahead of Russell for me.

Russell was 2nd on the team in scoring in 1962 (with the 3rd highest TS% on the team). He was almost always in the mix for top of scoring in on the team. He was certainly not a zero offensively, and that's not even accounting for the fact that his blocks led directly to fast breaks in most instances due to him blocking it in play to teammates.

FlashBolt
09-19-2017, 04:32 PM
C position was the most important and effective that time. It only makes sense that Celtics, when they had an elite center, was able to fully functionalize their team. If we reversed the roles of Wilt and Bill, Wilt would be the GOAT. I just don't see how Bill cracks any top ten lists because I believe we've seen better players having a larger responsibility than Bill. He's easily top 15, though.

valade16
09-19-2017, 04:36 PM
C position was the most important and effective that time. It only makes sense that Celtics, when they had an elite center, was able to fully functionalize their team. If we reversed the roles of Wilt and Bill, Wilt would be the GOAT. I just don't see how Bill cracks any top ten lists because I believe we've seen better players having a larger responsibility than Bill. He's easily top 15, though.

Maybe but if they swapped teams no way the Celtics win 11/13. Wilt was way too selfish and his stats came at times to the detriment of the team.

He lost in 61 to the Nationals with Paul Arizin, Tom Gola, and Guy Rodger; all HOF. He lost in 66 and 68 to Boston with Hal Greer, Chet Walker and Billy Cunningham; all HOF.

He lost continually with plenty of peak HOF'ers.

mngopher35
09-19-2017, 04:44 PM
Russell was 2nd on the team in scoring in 1962 (with the 3rd highest TS% on the team). He was almost always in the mix for top of scoring in on the team. He was certainly not a zero offensively, and that's not even accounting for the fact that his blocks led directly to fast breaks in most instances due to him blocking it in play to teammates.

Russell from 60-66 was a 14.5 and 4 type of guy on solid efficiency per 36 minutes in the playoffs. Green the last 3 seasons is a 14/6 type of guy on solid efficiency (112 ortg) in the playoffs. Both had a lot of talent around them and add some non number type value to a team (screens, versatility, spacing etc). Not to say that he is as good but I do think Hawk has a point on this type of comparison.

To me he is just too far off of guys like KAJ/Shaq/Wilt/Lebron on that end. I am curious if you actually have Russell at #2 or so?

valade16
09-19-2017, 04:51 PM
Russell from 60-66 was a 14.5 and 4 type of guy on solid efficiency per 36 minutes in the playoffs. Green the last 3 seasons is a 14/6 type of guy on solid efficiency (112 ortg) in the playoffs. Both had a lot of talent around them and add some non number type value to a team (screens, versatility, spacing etc). Not to say that he is as good but I do think Hawk has a point on this type of comparison.

To me he is just too far off of guys like KAJ/Shaq/Wilt/Lebron on that end. I am curious if you actually have Russell at #2 or so?

Not #2 but people are acting like he shouldn't be Top 10 or even Top 20. Dray isn't a team leader, he can't carry a team. Russell can and did. Cousy was a former MVP and it was Bill's team after 1 season.

I know stats are problematic, but Russell's highest WS/48 is .234. Kobe's is .224, Hakeem's is .234, Bird's is .244. Russell was a more impactful player than Dray is now comparatively .

FlashBolt
09-19-2017, 04:52 PM
Maybe but if they swapped teams no way the Celtics win 11/13. Wilt was way too selfish and his stats came at times to the detriment of the team.

He lost in 61 to the Nationals with Paul Arizin, Tom Gola, and Guy Rodger; all HOF. He lost in 66 and 68 to Boston with Hal Greer, Chet Walker and Billy Cunningham; all HOF.

He lost continually with plenty of peak HOF'ers.

But Bill is not beating that Celtics team so who is? Selfish or not, no one was stopping Wilt - especially if he had that kind of team.

valade16
09-19-2017, 04:59 PM
But Bill is not beating that Celtics team so who is? Selfish or not, no one was stopping Wilt - especially if he had that kind of team.

Disagree. Plenty of people stopped Wilt, that's why he won so few titles. If Russell swapped teams with Wilt his career they likely win about the same amount of titles. Russell would certainly win more than once with Hal Greer, Chet Walker and Billy Unningham.

FlashBolt
09-19-2017, 05:02 PM
Disagree. Plenty of people stopped Wilt, that's why he won so few titles. If Russell swapped teams with Wilt his career they likely win about the same amount of titles. Russell would certainly win more than once with Hal Greer, Chet Walker and Billy Unningham.

Okay, so who stops a Celtics with Wilt and no Russell?

mngopher35
09-19-2017, 05:02 PM
Not #2 but people are acting like he shouldn't be Top 10 or even Top 20. Dray isn't a team leader, he can't carry a team. Russell can and did. Cousy was a former MVP and it was Bill's team the moment he arrived.

I know stats are problematic, but Russell's highest WS/48 is .234. Kobe's is .224, Hakeem's is .234, Bird's is .244. Russell was a more impactful player than Dray is now competitively.

Oh ya I get part of why you were arguing and feel free to keep going I love debating/reading it, was just curious.
He is clearly more impactful than Green I totally agree but I don't think the offensive comparison is extremely off and closer than he would be to other top 10 guys on just that end.

My biggest issue with WS is how they seem a bit team dependent but even there he has 6 offensive WS for his playoff career, 21.8 defensive (and generally Kobe/Bird had great teams too). Like I said I value offense over defense so while it points to a high impact still to me I prefer the guy getting the high impact offensively more. I think right around Kobe is actually a solid place for Russell though. I likely rank Russell right behind the guys you mention tbh and at 11th overall so grouping him with those 3 is fine with me. I know least about him and Wilt though of the "top 11" so things can always change especially with them if I learn more and it is swaying enough.

valade16
09-19-2017, 05:12 PM
Oh ya I get part of why you were arguing and feel free to keep going I love debating/reading it, was just curious.
He is clearly more impactful than Green I totally agree but I don't think the offensive comparison is extremely off and closer than he would be to other top 10 guys on just that end.

My biggest issue with WS is how they seem a bit team dependent but even there he has 6 offensive WS for his playoff career, 21.8 defensive (and generally Kobe/Bird had great teams too). Like I said I value offense over defense so while it points to a high impact still to me I prefer the guy getting the high impact offensively more. I think right around Kobe is actually a solid place for Russell though. I likely rank Russell right behind the guys you mention tbh and at 11th overall so grouping him with those 3 is fine with me. I know least about him and Wilt though of the "top 11" so things can always change especially with them if I learn more and it is swaying enough.

It's interesting to me that in their time (and for a long time afterward) Bill was considered better than Wilt and now people use stats and relieve the opposite go round them while discounting similar modern statistical dominance with context. To use an extreme example, it would be like people 30 years from now saying Westbrook > Jordan because of his insane BPM and VORP.

valade16
09-19-2017, 05:13 PM
Okay, so who stops a Celtics with Wilt and no Russell?

Probably no one, but I'm not sure what that demonstrates to be honest.

mngopher35
09-19-2017, 05:57 PM
It's interesting to me that in their time (and for a long time afterward) Bill was considered better than Wilt and now people use stats and relieve the opposite go round them while discounting similar modern statistical dominance with context. To use an extreme example, it would be like people 30 years from now saying Westbrook > Jordan because of his insane BPM and VORP.

I think part of that has to do with the winning tbh but agree I have heard that said before. Maybe I am off in this but when I have come across someone who watched both play and someone sides with Russell it usually revolves around rings won more than individual ability. Even today with way more stats/video/info/tracking etc. available to make informed decisions we still hear "but 5>3" when it comes to Lebron/Kobe.

I think it is different since Westy/Jordan played in different eras as well but get your general point. I just haven't really come across many people who can give detailed explanation on why Russell the individual was better outside of team success. To this day I still think people overrate team success but we have just balanced that with people also overrating stats lol.

It is a tough thing to discuss in depth for me given I have seen only handfuls of games of each play. I do have Wilt over Russell though and think he was on a slightly different level of domination. I have heard/looked into some of his attitude/selfishness issues though so there is room for argument with him too (aka maybe success/the lack of winning wasn't just teammate dependent).

Lakers + Giants
09-19-2017, 08:16 PM
KJA the clear #2. His overall resume too strong to deny.

valade16
09-19-2017, 10:44 PM
KJA the clear #2. His overall resume too strong to deny.

He has Top 5 peak and Top 5 longevity. Very impressive

GREATNESS ONE
09-19-2017, 10:44 PM
KAJ easily. Do we vote or out post is enoggh?

dhopisthename
09-19-2017, 11:14 PM
KAJ easily. Do we vote or out post is enoggh?

vote

HandsOnTheWheel
09-19-2017, 11:22 PM
Looking like Kareem in a runaway

I'll start #3

Chronz
09-20-2017, 01:53 PM
What's the count. My pc got wrecked

Chronz
09-20-2017, 01:53 PM
KAJ easily. Do we vote or out post is enoggh?

Easily?

mngopher35
09-20-2017, 01:54 PM
What's the count. My pc got wrecked

KAJ 12, Lebron/Russell at 3 votes each.

We moved onto #3 now KAJ wins.