PDA

View Full Version : Best Second Overall Pick Of All-Time?



Jeffy25
08-07-2018, 03:59 PM
Our current draft

1.
2.
3. Michael Jordan - Bulls - 1984
4. Chris Paul - Hornets - 2005
5. Kevin Garnett - Wolves - 1995
6. Larry Bird - Celtics - 1978
7. Stephen Curry - Warriors - 2009
8. Willis Reed - Knicks - 1964
9. Dirk Nowitzki - Bucks (traded to Mavs) - 1998
10. Paul Pierce - Celtics - 1998
11. Reggie Miller - Pacers - 1987
12. Julius Erving - Bucks (but played in ABA) - 1972
13. Kobe Bryant - Hornets (traded to Lakers) - 1996
14. Clyde Drexler - Blazers - 1983
15. Steve Nash - Suns - 1996
16. John Stockton - Jazz - 1984
17. Shawn Kemp - Sonics/Thunder - 1989
18. Joe Dumars - Pistons - 1985
19. Tiny Archibald - Royals/Kings - 1970
20. Larry Nance - Suns - 1981
21. Michael Finley - Suns - 1995
22. Norm Nixon - Lakers - 1977
23. Alex English - Bucks - 1976
24. Sam Cassell - Rockets - 1993
25. Mark Price - Mavs (traded to Cavs) - 1986
26. Vlade Divac - Lakers - 1989
27. Dennis Rodman - Pistons - 1986
28. Tony Parker - Spurs - 2001
29. Dennis Johnson - Sonics - 1976
30. Jimmy Butler - Bulls - 2011

https://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/draft_finder.cgi?request=1&year_min=&year_max=&round_min=&round_max=&pick_overall_min=2&pick_overall_max=2&franch_id=&college_id=0&pos_is_g=Y&pos_is_gf=Y&pos_is_f=Y&pos_is_fg=Y&pos_is_fc=Y&pos_is_c=Y&pos_is_cf=Y&is_active=&is_hof=&c1stat=&c1comp=gt&c1val=&c2stat=&c2comp=gt&c2val=&c3stat=&c3comp=gt&c3val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=ws

Some notable picks
Bill Russell
Jerry West
Gary Payton
Jason Kidd
Bob Pettit
Kevin Durant
Bailey Howell
Wes Unseld
LaMarcus Aldridge
Rick Barry
Tyson Chandler
Terry Cummings
Alonzo Mourning
Marcus Camby
Isiah Thomas
Earl Monroe
Bob McAdoo
Mike Bibby
Rudy Tomjanovich
Antonio McDyess
Kenny Anderson
Dave Bing
Marvin Williams
Rik Smits
Emeka Okafor
Victor Oladipo
Michael Kidd-Gilchrist
Evan Turner
Michael Beasley
Derrick Williams
Brandon Ingram
Jabari Parker
Lonzo Ball
D'Angelo Russell
Hasheem Thabeet
Steve Francis

Jeffy25
08-07-2018, 04:04 PM
I think this is going to be a great debate, we have some legit arguments here. I'll be making this poll for 4 days so we can discuss.


Russell has the success, but his era. West may have been even a better player, but he failed to the get the chips. Durant has the skill in the world, but is still kind of young and people hate him for going to GSW. Chandler, Camby, Mourning, Cummings, Payton and Kidd all had nice to great careers. Pettit and Unseld were great players for their time.

Going to be a great argument, but I think it ends up coming down to West vs Russell (which then I think Russell takes it with the chips). But Payton and Kidd have a debate, as does some of the classic players. But Durant could also get plenty of votes.

I'm interested to see everyones votes.

MygirlhatesCod
08-07-2018, 04:08 PM
KD is the better talent here. I hate comparing era's but I cant see any timeframe KD doesn't shine. same could be said about the logo. I just think out of everyone on that list KD has more overall talent.

mrblisterdundee
08-07-2018, 04:13 PM
There's been all sorts of arguments against Russell. He was on a stacked Celtics team that had one of the easiest avenues imaginable to their championships. He was athletic for his era, but not in modernity. His offense was mediocre. He's just a glorified Rodman.
But it's difficult to compare different eras with different playing styles and different advancements in the game and player support. Russell was awesome in his era, and he has more championships than fingers. I think that means something.

MygirlhatesCod
08-07-2018, 04:32 PM
There's been all sorts of arguments against Russell. He was on a stacked Celtics team that had one of the easiest avenues imaginable to their championships. He was athletic for his era, but not in modernity. His offense was mediocre. He's just a glorified Rodman.
But it's difficult to compare different eras with different playing styles and different advancements in the game and player support. Russell was awesome in his era, and he has more championships than fingers. I think that means something.

I believe in this sentiment.

while my belief is there, its truly hard to ignore that during his playing time there were only like 8 teams in the league. regardless he was dominant in what was then the best compiled group of talent.

KD is in that same mode of domination within a larger more skilled pool.

nastynice
08-07-2018, 04:38 PM
KD is the better talent here. I hate comparing era's but I cant see any timeframe KD doesn't shine. same could be said about the logo. I just think out of everyone on that list KD has more overall talent.

Yea, it's just hard to put him that high on an all time list over players who've already had full careers, so I don't know, but when all said and done I think he'd make a strong push for top spot here

HandsOnTheWheel
08-07-2018, 05:15 PM
Snake

valade16
08-07-2018, 05:30 PM
This is the ultimate accolades vs talent debate.

Who had a more stacked supporting cast? Bill Russell or Kevin Durant?

Chronz
08-07-2018, 05:50 PM
This is the ultimate accolades vs talent debate.

Who had a more stacked supporting cast? Bill Russell or Kevin Durant?

Bill Russell's team needed him

jaydubb
08-07-2018, 06:46 PM
Jerry west put up the numbers as a player, got the chips as an exec.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

ciaban
08-07-2018, 11:09 PM
Bill Russell's team needed him
It's wierd because those Celtics teams had so many hall of famers, but at the same time, there were only like 8 teams so of course someone ended up getting stacked. KD has played with 2 different franchises that surrounded him with MULTIPLE future hall of famers in their primes.


Jerry west put up the numbers as a player, got the chips as an exec.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

IDK if that's totally fair, Jerry did win a ring as a player.

Vinylman
08-08-2018, 07:31 AM
the way you compile these lists (ie ordering) creates a bias and significantly impacts the results...

mightybosstone
08-08-2018, 07:34 AM
the way you compile these lists (ie ordering) creates a bias and significantly impacts the results...

He's not ordering the lists at all. When you use Basketball Reference's draft finder tool to search players, it automatically orders them by most career win shares.

That seems totally fair to me to post them in that order. Typically the guys with the best careers will rise to the top.

Jeffy25
08-08-2018, 01:11 PM
the way you compile these lists (ie ordering) creates a bias and significantly impacts the results...

I'm just going down the Win Shares list, so that's their order.

I do remove a handful of guys because they have no chance and were drafted in the mid 50's for example, and I replace them with some current players. But that's it.

If you are too lazy to actually read all the names, and vote before reading, that wouldn't be my problem, that's the problem with people clicking without reading.

basch152
08-08-2018, 08:51 PM
I'll be honest, I've always felt gary Payton has never gotten the credit he deserves. you're talking about arguably the best defensive guard ever, who was also a playmaker and could score.

when they finally put Payton on MJ in the finals he made MJ have his worst games in finals history and almost helped the Sonics make a comeback because the bulls had no answer while he was shutting MJ down.

that is an incredibly underrated feat

cmellofan15
08-08-2018, 09:03 PM
I'm just going down the Win Shares list, so that's their order.

I do remove a handful of guys because they have no chance and were drafted in the mid 50's for example, and I replace them with some current players. But that's it.

If you are too lazy to actually read all the names, and vote before reading, that wouldn't be my problem, that's the problem with people clicking without reading.

Clicking links is hard for some people lol

Raps08-09 Champ
08-08-2018, 10:59 PM
Russell.

Jeffy25
08-08-2018, 11:08 PM
I'll be honest, I've always felt gary Payton has never gotten the credit he deserves. you're talking about arguably the best defensive guard ever, who was also a playmaker and could score.

when they finally put Payton on MJ in the finals he made MJ have his worst games in finals history and almost helped the Sonics make a comeback because the bulls had no answer while he was shutting MJ down.

that is an incredibly underrated feat

I still feel like the Sonics got away with some illegal zones there as well

That said, I agree, one of the best point guards ever.

Dade County
08-09-2018, 01:30 AM
KD is the better talent here. I hate comparing era's but I cant see any timeframe KD doesn't shine. same could be said about the logo. I just think out of everyone on that list KD has more overall talent.

What do you meanly shine?

Does KD having 2 championships make you think differently of him? Or your opinion of KD has always been the same?

Meaning if KD didn't have 2 rings would you still say that he has proven to have more talent then the guys on the number 2 draft list?

So lets say if KD stayed in OKC or went somewhere else beside OKC, and still didn't have any rings to this day; would you still fill that he can shine in any area?

JAZZNC
08-09-2018, 03:22 AM
I still feel like the Sonics got away with some illegal zones there as well

That said, I agree, one of the best point guards ever.

Yeah, like would you really take Jason Kidd over him?

I feel like if you remove the guy who could start at center in the NBA Finals I think the top tier of PGs is Curry, Stockton, Paul, Payton.

Then you have Kidd, Thomas, Nash, and Westbrooks of the world.

I really feel like I'm forgetting somebody here???


On topic I feel like Russell has to be the pick here. He's the ultimate winner. None of the other guys even come close. I guess if KD wins another 4 titles or so he may get there.

MygirlhatesCod
08-09-2018, 08:49 AM
What do you meanly shine?

Does KD having 2 championships make you think differently of him? Or your opinion of KD has always been the same?

Meaning if KD didn't have 2 rings would you still say that he has proven to have more talent then the guys on the number 2 draft list?

So lets say if KD stayed in OKC or went somewhere else beside OKC, and still didn't have any rings to this day; would you still fill that he can shine in any area?

meaning he would dominate in any era.

rings in general don't hold tremendous weight to me when viewed in context. I know CP3, Nash (he kinda has a ring with the dubs), Malone, Chuck and many more were special players. in general its very difficult to win regardless of how talented a player is.
Lebron is a perfect example. who would have ever thought at this point in his career he would only have 3 rings? doesn't change the fact that he is sharing a tier with MJ.
KD is gonna finish as the second best sf ever and easily the most lethal front court offensive threat from anywhere on the floor.

Vinylman
08-09-2018, 08:49 AM
He's not ordering the lists at all. When you use Basketball Reference's draft finder tool to search players, it automatically orders them by most career win shares.

That seems totally fair to me to post them in that order. Typically the guys with the best careers will rise to the top.

I didn't realize that was how he compiled it but that still doesn't change the inherent bias (ie career WS)... I still think they should just be listed by year of selection... it forces the reader to review the list and actually think...

It still impacts the results

Hawkeye15
08-09-2018, 09:46 AM
I'll be honest, I've always felt gary Payton has never gotten the credit he deserves. you're talking about arguably the best defensive guard ever, who was also a playmaker and could score.

when they finally put Payton on MJ in the finals he made MJ have his worst games in finals history and almost helped the Sonics make a comeback because the bulls had no answer while he was shutting MJ down.

that is an incredibly underrated feat

He might be a bit under the radar, but he also doesn't belong in the conversation with Russell, Durant, or West.

mightybosstone
08-09-2018, 10:52 AM
I didn't realize that was how he compiled it but that still doesn't change the inherent bias (ie career WS)... I still think they should just be listed by year of selection... it forces the reader to review the list and actually think...

It still impacts the results

Mmm.... There was a voter in a previous thread who suggested Andre Miller deserved voting consideration over a guy like Willis Reed who was only 4-5 spots lower on the list. PSD posters are lazy and (sometimes) they aren't especially bright. If you tell them, "Scroll through this list of 60 names and pick the best one," you're probably still going to get posters who just go with the first big name they say. There's no way to do this that doesn't benefit one player or another.

Also, that's an extra step for the OP, who's done a great job just getting these posts up in the first place. I'm fine with whatever strategy he wants to use to post these names.

mightybosstone
08-09-2018, 10:57 AM
As for this vote, it's Russell for me. Personally, I'd have Russell and West over Durant at this point. Voting Durant ahead of those guys means he's already a top 15 player, and I'm not ready to say that. And a vote for Durant over Russell is like saying Durant is a top 10 all-time player, which I'm DEFINITELY not ready to say.

Frankly, I don't think I'll ever rank Durant ahead of Russell. Yes, his peak numbers are better. But era dominance and context mean something. The fact that Russell anchored the most dominant team in the history of the NBA and won 11 titles in 13 seasons while Durant joined an already all-time great time to piggy back his way to two rings should matter. Throw on top of that his five MVPs and his consideration as arguably the greatest defensive player in NBA history, and I just don't think Durant will ever rack up the accolades to top that.

Hawkeye15
08-09-2018, 10:58 AM
Yeah, like would you really take Jason Kidd over him?

I feel like if you remove the guy who could start at center in the NBA Finals I think the top tier of PGs is Curry, Stockton, Paul, Payton.

Then you have Kidd, Thomas, Nash, and Westbrooks of the world.

I really feel like I'm forgetting somebody here???


On topic I feel like Russell has to be the pick here. He's the ultimate winner. None of the other guys even come close. I guess if KD wins another 4 titles or so he may get there.

I would drop Payton below the tier of Magic, Paul, Stockton.

Paul, Payton, Nash, and Kidd. Maybe Zeke are next tier.

Hawkeye15
08-09-2018, 10:59 AM
As for this vote, it's Russell for me. Personally, I'd have Russell and West over Durant at this point. Voting Durant ahead of those guys means he's already a top 15 player, and I'm not ready to say that. And a vote for Durant over Russell is like saying Durant is a top 10 all-time player, which I'm DEFINITELY not ready to say.

Frankly, I don't think I'll ever rank Durant ahead of Russell. Yes, his peak numbers are better. But era dominance and context mean something. The fact that Russell anchored the most dominant team in the history of the NBA and won 11 titles in 13 seasons while Durant joined an already all-time great time to piggy back his way to two rings should matter. Throw on top of that his five MVPs and his consideration as arguably the greatest defensive player in NBA history, and I just don't think Durant will ever rack up the accolades to top that.

context for sure matters, and its going to crush Durant in rankings.

mightybosstone
08-09-2018, 11:05 AM
I would drop Payton below the tier of Magic, Paul, Stockton.

Paul, Payton, Nash, and Kidd. Maybe Zeke are next tier.

Payton is below Nash and Kidd for me. I'd probably go with something like:

1. Magic
2. Oscar (if you consider him a PG)
3. Paul
4. Stockton
5. Frazier
6. Zeke
7. Nash
8. Kidd
9. Payton

I think Payton gets way too overrated in these conversations. Is he an all-time great defensive PG? Yes. But being a great defender at the position where defense is the least important doesn't help him overcome the massive advantage that guys like Nash and Kidd have on him from a playmaking standpoint.

Also, have you ever looked at the guy's playoff numbers? If people want to rip on KG for his poor playoff performance, they should go check out the absolute dumpster fire that is Gary Payton's playoff numbers.

Hawkeye15
08-09-2018, 11:25 AM
Payton is below Nash and Kidd for me. I'd probably go with something like:

1. Magic
2. Oscar (if you consider him a PG)
3. Paul
4. Stockton
5. Frazier
6. Zeke
7. Nash
8. Kidd
9. Payton

I think Payton gets way too overrated in these conversations. Is he an all-time great defensive PG? Yes. But being a great defender at the position where defense is the least important doesn't help him overcome the massive advantage that guys like Nash and Kidd have on him from a playmaking standpoint.

Also, have you ever looked at the guy's playoff numbers? If people want to rip on KG for his poor playoff performance, they should go check out the absolute dumpster fire that is Gary Payton's playoff numbers.

nostalgia factor clearly puts Payton higher for me, but I don't disagree with your take at all. He is clearly below the top tier guys. Even if we want to lump him in with tier 3 guys, its rightly fair.

I knew he regressed come playoffs, but looking at his numbers, he seriously went Joe Johnson on it, I didn't realize it was that bad.

MygirlhatesCod
08-09-2018, 11:48 AM
As for this vote, it's Russell for me. Personally, I'd have Russell and West over Durant at this point. Voting Durant ahead of those guys means he's already a top 15 player, and I'm not ready to say that. And a vote for Durant over Russell is like saying Durant is a top 10 all-time player, which I'm DEFINITELY not ready to say.

Frankly, I don't think I'll ever rank Durant ahead of Russell. Yes, his peak numbers are better. But era dominance and context mean something. The fact that Russell anchored the most dominant team in the history of the NBA and won 11 titles in 13 seasons while Durant joined an already all-time great time to piggy back his way to two rings should matter. Throw on top of that his five MVPs and his consideration as arguably the greatest defensive player in NBA history, and I just don't think Durant will ever rack up the accolades to top that.

out of curiosity who do you have ahead of Russell besides MJ, Lebron, KAJ, and Wilt?

MygirlhatesCod
08-09-2018, 11:51 AM
Payton is below Nash and Kidd for me. I'd probably go with something like:

1. Magic
2. Oscar (if you consider him a PG)
3. Paul
4. Stockton
5. Frazier
6. Zeke
7. Nash
8. Kidd
9. Payton

I think Payton gets way too overrated in these conversations. Is he an all-time great defensive PG? Yes. But being a great defender at the position where defense is the least important doesn't help him overcome the massive advantage that guys like Nash and Kidd have on him from a playmaking standpoint.

Also, have you ever looked at the guy's playoff numbers? If people want to rip on KG for his poor playoff performance, they should go check out the absolute dumpster fire that is Gary Payton's playoff numbers.

why is Curry not on that list?

Rivera
08-09-2018, 11:57 AM
i love Bill but Jerry West was a better player. He just was. It sucks because everytime Russells name pops up its super hard to place him and I feel like we (especially me) disrespect him. Jerry West is a better player, Kevin Durant is a better player.

COOLbeans
08-09-2018, 12:13 PM
why is Curry not on that list?

bias :laugh2:

Tg11
08-09-2018, 12:38 PM
Easily be Michael

Quinnsanity
08-09-2018, 12:59 PM
Guys it's Bill Russell come on.

mightybosstone
08-09-2018, 01:05 PM
out of curiosity who do you have ahead of Russell besides MJ, Lebron, KAJ, and Wilt?
MJ, Lebron, Kareem, Wilt, Shaq, Duncan, Hakeem, Magic and Bird are all ahead of him for me, with Kobe typically going right behind him.

why is Curry not on that list?

Honestly, I just forgot about him. I saw the other list and was just going off that. I've had that PG list in my head for years, and Curry's really only entered that conversation over the last 3-4 seasons, so I sometimes just forget about the guy. Adding Curry in, my list is probably more like:

1. Magic
2. Oscar
3. Paul
4. Curry
5. Stockton
6. Frazier
7. Zeke
8. Nash
9. Kidd
10. Payton

kobebabe
08-09-2018, 01:12 PM
for me it's
1. Russell
2. West
3. Durant (he isn't above those 2 imho)

MygirlhatesCod
08-09-2018, 02:24 PM
MJ, Lebron, Kareem, Wilt, Shaq, Duncan, Hakeem, Magic and Bird are all ahead of him for me, with Kobe typically going right behind him.
Honestly, I just forgot about him. I saw the other list and was just going off that. I've had that PG list in my head for years, and Curry's really only entered that conversation over the last 3-4 seasons, so I sometimes just forget about the guy. Adding Curry in, my list is probably more like:

1. Magic
2. Oscar
3. Paul
4. Curry
5. Stockton
6. Frazier
7. Zeke
8. Nash
9. Kidd
10. Payton

that's sound. I think once KD finishes he will be in that top ten talk.

MygirlhatesCod
08-09-2018, 02:27 PM
MJ, Lebron, Kareem, Wilt, Shaq, Duncan, Hakeem, Magic and Bird are all ahead of him for me, with Kobe typically going right behind him.


Honestly, I just forgot about him. I saw the other list and was just going off that. I've had that PG list in my head for years, and Curry's really only entered that conversation over the last 3-4 seasons, so I sometimes just forget about the guy. Adding Curry in, my list is probably more like:

1. Magic
2. Oscar
3. Paul
4. Curry
5. Stockton
6. Frazier
7. Zeke
8. Nash
9. Kidd
10. Payton

at first I was like wtf is curry doing sitting at 4 especially behind paul but if he just entered your list 3-4 years ago and is already 4th then he will jump up in a few.

MygirlhatesCod
08-09-2018, 02:32 PM
MJ, Lebron, Kareem, Wilt, Shaq, Duncan, Hakeem, Magic and Bird are all ahead of him for me, with Kobe typically going right behind him.


Honestly, I just forgot about him. I saw the other list and was just going off that. I've had that PG list in my head for years, and Curry's really only entered that conversation over the last 3-4 seasons, so I sometimes just forget about the guy. Adding Curry in, my list is probably more like:

1. Magic
2. Oscar
3. Paul
4. Curry
5. Stockton
6. Frazier
7. Zeke
8. Nash
9. Kidd
10. Payton

I know I probably get killed for this but I would place the dream ahead of Duncan any day.

Hawkeye15
08-09-2018, 02:51 PM
I know I probably get killed for this but I would place the dream ahead of Duncan any day.

I am so biased to Hakeem, and admit I rank him too high (top 10 ever). But you will get killed for putting him ahead of Duncan. By the time Hakeem's offense became dominant, he was no longer the defender he was early in his career. Just amazing as a player, but he isn't on Duncan's level. I don't think anyways.

basch152
08-09-2018, 03:24 PM
I would take Hakeem over duncan.

MygirlhatesCod
08-09-2018, 03:36 PM
I am so biased to Hakeem, and admit I rank him too high (top 10 ever). But you will get killed for putting him ahead of Duncan. By the time Hakeem's offense became dominant, he was no longer the defender he was early in his career. Just amazing as a player, but he isn't on Duncan's level. I don't think anyways.

I think his prime years were better but the dreams drop off was pretty swift. that's were I differ with rankings. longevity isn't a major contributor to me. at least 6 years of prime works for me. I prefer peak to longevity. like dreams 93 and 94 were to me better than the best two seasons I could put together for timmy. so I guess career tim and peak dream is a better way of putting it.

Hawkeye15
08-09-2018, 04:03 PM
I think his prime years were better but the dreams drop off was pretty swift. that's were I differ with rankings. longevity isn't a major contributor to me. at least 6 years of prime works for me. I prefer peak to longevity. like dreams 93 and 94 were to me better than the best two seasons I could put together for timmy. so I guess career tim and peak dream is a better way of putting it.

When ranking, so many factors. With your methods, I assume you don't have Kobe in your top 10-12?

Also, 2001-03' Duncan is better than anything Hakeem put out, imo.

valade16
08-09-2018, 04:22 PM
I am so biased to Hakeem, and admit I rank him too high (top 10 ever). But you will get killed for putting him ahead of Duncan. By the time Hakeem's offense became dominant, he was no longer the defender he was early in his career. Just amazing as a player, but he isn't on Duncan's level. I don't think anyways.

When I was compiling playoff peak stats, it's weird how close their advanced stats are:

Duncan (99-07) 27.0 PER | 7.8 BPM
Dream (86-95) 26.9 PER | 7.8 BPM

mightybosstone
08-09-2018, 04:25 PM
I know I probably get killed for this but I would place the dream ahead of Duncan any day.


When ranking, so many factors. With your methods, I assume you don't have Kobe in your top 10-12?

Also, 2001-03' Duncan is better than anything Hakeem put out, imo.

For me, the whole Wilt vs. Shaq vs. Duncan vs. Hakeem debate is really tough to pinpoint an obvious 1-4. After MJ, Lebron and Kareem, those are always my next four guys, but the order is constantly changing. Typically I have Wilt first because of his overall statistical dominance with some combination of Shaq, Duncan and Hakeem afterward.

But there really isn't a wrong answer, IMO. Statistically Hakeem is a step behind, but I think his defensive reputation and postseason resume deserves a lot of respect. And from a sheer skill standpoint, I've always felt like Hakeem was the most skilled player of the four. But skills don't necessarily translate to efficiency, and that's where he tends to get knocked in these conversations.

COOLbeans
08-09-2018, 04:30 PM
Paul isn't better than any of those guys mentioned in that list IMO. Paul is in the 5-10 range behind

Magic
Oscar
Stockton
Curry
Isaiah
Kidd
Payton

This whole glorification of Paul when he just got into the Conference finals after needing Harden to have an MVP season to have Home Court Advantage. Not sure why hes so overrated.

MygirlhatesCod
08-09-2018, 04:33 PM
When ranking, so many factors. With your methods, I assume you don't have Kobe in your top 10-12?

Also, 2001-03' Duncan is better than anything Hakeem put out, imo.

he is peeking though. I change the list up every now and then when I start going into the black hole that is stat digging.

Jeffy25
08-09-2018, 05:33 PM
Paul isn't better than any of those guys mentioned in that list IMO. Paul is in the 5-10 range behind

Magic
Oscar
Stockton
Curry
Isaiah
Kidd
Payton

This whole glorification of Paul when he just got into the Conference finals after needing Harden to have an MVP season to have Home Court Advantage. Not sure why hes so overrated.

Advanced stats love him. Statistically, he's behind Magic, and maybe Stockton only (passing Stockton now).

He crushes guys like Isaiah.

If you want a PG that leads you to a title, and he's a playmaker, the guys around him really really matter. And you listed a lot of playmakers on there.

How can you give Kidd credit, but not Paul? Paul destroys Kidd all over the place (better shooter, better passer, better defender). Kidd did more in the playoffs from a team perspective, but Kidd also had more help in his career than pre Rockets Paul.

valade16
08-09-2018, 05:51 PM
Advanced stats love him. Statistically, he's behind Magic, and maybe Stockton only (passing Stockton now).

He crushes guys like Isaiah.

If you want a PG that leads you to a title, and he's a playmaker, the guys around him really really matter. And you listed a lot of playmakers on there.

How can you give Kidd credit, but not Paul? Paul destroys Kidd all over the place (better shooter, better passer, better defender). Kidd did more in the playoffs from a team perspective, but Kidd also had more help in his career than pre Rockets Paul.

I don't know if you can say those about CP3 in comparison to Kidd. Kidd was a world class defender at PG himself and was taller and stronger than CP3. He was also one of the better passers in history. But you're overall point is correct in that CP3 was the better player.

ewing
08-10-2018, 06:34 AM
Advanced stats love him. Statistically, he's behind Magic, and maybe Stockton only (passing Stockton now).

He crushes guys like Isaiah.

If you want a PG that leads you to a title, and he's a playmaker, the guys around him really really matter. And you listed a lot of playmakers on there.

How can you give Kidd credit, but not Paul? Paul destroys Kidd all over the place (better shooter, better passer, better defender). Kidd did more in the playoffs from a team perspective, but Kidd also had more help in his career than pre Rockets Paul.

Paul was is/was not in any way a better passer then Jason Kidd. Iím also not convinced he was a better defender.- might be

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ewing
08-10-2018, 08:36 AM
I don't know if you can say those about CP3 in comparison to Kidd. Kidd was a world class defender at PG himself and was taller and stronger than CP3. He was also one of the better passers in history. But you're overall point is correct in that CP3 was the better player.

IDK if I'd take peak Paul over peak Kidd though. Paul is an interesting case to me. I think he is a guy with every skill in the world but I also think he is a guy whose style both inflated his stats a little and held him back a little. As much as most in the advanced stats crowd love rail on ball stoppers when you have an efficient one like Paul they rave about him. Paul has always been a PG that dominates the ball and probes a lot. I always wanted to see him attack more and move the ball quicker. The fact that he can be efficient and not turn the ball over a ton while playing this style is a credit to how good he is in a lot of areas. Kidd on the other hand was the opposite. He pushed and advanced the ball faster and better then anyone not named Magic Johnson. The fact that he created so much pace and made the defensive move so much without dominating the ball mean his #s won't reflect his impact as much. Both great defenders and passers. CP3 was worlds better creating his own offense and in today's game would be the hands down choice IMO. PLus he was elite for longer. Still I am not convinced at peak that he was a more impactful player.

ewing
08-10-2018, 08:41 AM
Advanced stats love him. Statistically, he's behind Magic, and maybe Stockton only (passing Stockton now).

He crushes guys like Isaiah.

If you want a PG that leads you to a title, and he's a playmaker, the guys around him really really matter. And you listed a lot of playmakers on there.

How can you give Kidd credit, but not Paul? Paul destroys Kidd all over the place (better shooter, better passer, better defender). Kidd did more in the playoffs from a team perspective, but Kidd also had more help in his career than pre Rockets Paul.

Really? Kidd did play in a weak East but idk if he had more help. I'd really have to look that one up.

MygirlhatesCod
08-10-2018, 09:07 AM
Brandon Armstrong
Jason Collins
Derrick Dial
Steve Goodrich
Lucious Harris
Richard Jefferson
Anthony Johnson
Kerry Kittles
Todd MacCulloch
Donny Marshall
Kenyon Martin
Brian Scalabrine
Reggie Slater
Keith Van Horn

the team above is who Kidd took to the finals in 2002.

CP3 has had much better teams for the past like 9 years.

Hawkeye15
08-10-2018, 09:08 AM
Paul was is/was not in any way a better passer then Jason Kidd. Iím also not convinced he was a better defender.- might be

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Paul is one of the better defenders we have seen at the PG position. Kidd was as well for some time, but not as consistently long as Paul. Paul crushes Kidd in scoring as well. He is simply the better PG. Though Kidd was a stat bender, in that his impact may have outweighed his statistical production.

Paul's issue, is he gets hurt at the worst possible times, or lays a dud (or makes a series of weird plays) at the worst possible time. Seriously, it amazes me the timing of his ailments or brainfarts. Like some spiritual being is doing him over wrong.

Hawkeye15
08-10-2018, 09:11 AM
Really? Kidd did play in a weak East but idk if he had more help. I'd really have to look that one up.

He is likely referring to Paul's NO days, in which case he has a point. Paul made West and Chandler what they were, they were nothing before him. Hell West wasn't much after him.

Rivera
08-10-2018, 09:15 AM
Brandon Armstrong
Jason Collins
Derrick Dial
Steve Goodrich
Lucious Harris
Richard Jefferson
Anthony Johnson
Kerry Kittles
Todd MacCulloch
Donny Marshall
Kenyon Martin
Brian Scalabrine
Reggie Slater
Keith Van Horn

the team above is who Kidd took to the finals in 2002.

CP3 has had much better teams for the past like 9 years.

i know in hindisght these names seem terrible but they werent bad. Yes the east was super weak but

Collins was a good backup C
Lucious Harris could shoot
RJ was young and athletic as you know real good player
Kerry Kittles was a good pro, could shoot great movement without the ball solid D
MacCulloch has a few solid years, had a lot of promise and was solid on D
KMart was a beast
KVH was a solid player who could strech the floor

they were a good squad together. I do agree CP3 had much better teams, but CP3 was also in the west. If you put CP3s teams in the east, they have a legit shot to make the finals, you put this 02 team in the west, they may not make the WCF

MygirlhatesCod
08-10-2018, 09:30 AM
i know in hindisght these names seem terrible but they werent bad. Yes the east was super weak but

Collins was a good backup C
Lucious Harris could shoot
RJ was young and athletic as you know real good player
Kerry Kittles was a good pro, could shoot great movement without the ball solid D
MacCulloch has a few solid years, had a lot of promise and was solid on D
KMart was a beast
KVH was a solid player who could strech the floor

they were a good squad together. I do agree CP3 had much better teams, but CP3 was also in the west. If you put CP3s teams in the east, they have a legit shot to make the finals, you put this 02 team in the west, they may not make the WCF

he never passed the second round before Houston. lost to middle of the pack teams like Utah, blazers, Houston (2015).

if the clips were in the east maybe they get farther one of those years but the gap isn't that far.

mightybosstone
08-10-2018, 11:51 AM
Paul isn't better than any of those guys mentioned in that list IMO. Paul is in the 5-10 range behind

Magic
Oscar
Stockton
Curry
Isaiah
Kidd
Payton

This whole glorification of Paul when he just got into the Conference finals after needing Harden to have an MVP season to have Home Court Advantage. Not sure why hes so overrated.

Why do rings have to be the sole factor by which we judge players? Doing so completely ignores the idea of basketball as a team game. Oscar never won a ring until he played with Kareem well past the prime of his career. Stockton never won a ring despite playing with Malone pretty much his whole career. And Kidd and Payton never won their rings until they were several years past their primes playing as role players with superior superstar players (plus Payton's postseason numbers are truly horrific).

Paul has had a remarkable career, and he was statistically far more dominant than every player on that list other than Magic and Oscar. Hell, his peak seasons in New Orleans are up there with pretty much anything those two were ever capable of. And if you actually look at the guy's postseason production, Paul's numbers are pretty stellar. Did you know Chris Paul is 6th all-time in both career postseason PER and career postseason WS/48 and third in career postseason BPM?

I'm sorry, but your take on this is just so wildly off-base. You want to criticize Harden for his postseason failures? Fine, it's mostly warranted. You want to criticize Paul for that Game 5 loss against OKC in 2014? OK, that's fair. But that was one game. If you look at the rest of the guy's resume, even in the postseason, the guy has been spectacular. Everyone likes to bring up that Game 5 against OKC, but nobody wants to talk about the many clutch postseason games he's had in his career. Hell, he WAS the Rockets' closer last season in the playoffs.

ewing
08-10-2018, 12:12 PM
Why do rings have to be the sole factor by which we judge players? Doing so completely ignores the idea of basketball as a team game. Oscar never won a ring until he played with Kareem well past the prime of his career. Stockton never won a ring despite playing with Malone pretty much his whole career. And Kidd and Payton never won their rings until they were several years past their primes playing as role players with superior superstar players (plus Payton's postseason numbers are truly horrific).

Paul has had a remarkable career, and he was statistically far more dominant than every player on that list other than Magic and Oscar. Hell, his peak seasons in New Orleans are up there with pretty much anything those two were ever capable of. And if you actually look at the guy's postseason production, Paul's numbers are pretty stellar. Did you know Chris Paul is 6th all-time in both career postseason PER and career postseason WS/48 and third in career postseason BPM?

I'm sorry, but your take on this is just so wildly off-base. You want to criticize Harden for his postseason failures? Fine, it's mostly warranted. You want to criticize Paul for that Game 5 loss against OKC in 2014? OK, that's fair. But that was one game. If you look at the rest of the guy's resume, even in the postseason, the guy has been spectacular. Everyone likes to bring up that Game 5 against OKC, but nobody wants to talk about the many clutch postseason games he's had in his career. Hell, he WAS the Rockets' closer last season in the playoffs.

Agreed. Paul is a pit bull and plays big on the big stage. I do think his style produces #s the that are a little inflated but he unlike GP, KG, and Scottie who are all darlings around here always showed up for the post season


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ewing
08-10-2018, 12:17 PM
He is likely referring to Paul's NO days, in which case he has a point. Paul made West and Chandler what they were, they were nothing before him. Hell West wasn't much after him.

TC was a beast and West was very good on Indy. Little lesser role but same guy IMO. Paul did attack and push a lot more in NO which I liked


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ahriman
08-10-2018, 01:46 PM
West was a big part of what made Indy such a tough team. Excellent player

Hawkeye15
08-10-2018, 02:27 PM
TC was a beast and West was very good on Indy. Little lesser role but same guy IMO. Paul did attack and push a lot more in NO which I liked


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

well he ended up the biggest crybaby known to man. Seriously, Paul can be tough to watch.

Chronz
08-10-2018, 05:49 PM
he never passed the second round before Houston. lost to middle of the pack teams like Utah, blazers, Houston (2015).

if the clips were in the east maybe they get farther one of those years but the gap isn't that far.

They lost to superior teams is all I see. Big whoop.

Chronz
08-10-2018, 05:50 PM
TC was a beast and West was very good on Indy. Little lesser role but same guy IMO. Paul did attack and push a lot more in NO which I liked


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
He was just faster but he's always been a slow it down guy, which does give him an edge statistically. Doc rivers got him to run more than before too

ewing
08-10-2018, 05:54 PM
[QUOTE=Chronz;32498373]They lost to superior teams is all I see. Big whoop.[/

We know


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Chronz
08-10-2018, 05:58 PM
GP had bad post season numbers? I guess but take out his b2b chokes and they look good er

Chronz
08-10-2018, 05:58 PM
[QUOTE=Chronz;32498373]They lost to superior teams is all I see. Big whoop.[/

We know


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No gp instance in his losses tho

YAALREADYKNO
08-10-2018, 10:31 PM
ďI canít trust myself so hell no I canít trust you
Iím ballin, you can call me BILL RUSSELLĒ
-FLOCKA

Jeffy25
08-10-2018, 10:56 PM
I don't know if you can say those about CP3 in comparison to Kidd. Kidd was a world class defender at PG himself and was taller and stronger than CP3. He was also one of the better passers in history. But you're overall point is correct in that CP3 was the better player.

I admit, that's simply my impression, and I don't know how much attention I paid to him before he was 30.

Jeffy25
08-10-2018, 11:00 PM
Really? Kidd did play in a weak East but idk if he had more help. I'd really have to look that one up.

I dunno, I think those Nets squads were better than Paul's Clippers, and certainly in Dallas.

If we remove Kidd and Paul from their respective teams.

braidster#1
08-11-2018, 01:27 AM
Sam Bowie - 1984 - Blazers

ewing
08-11-2018, 07:12 AM
[QUOTE=ewing;32498383]

No gp instance in his losses tho

I agree on the other hand his Clippers were a disappointment. Claiming that they shouldn't have won a playoff round makes you look like a homer.

ewing
08-11-2018, 07:18 AM
I dunno, I think those Nets squads were better than Paul's Clippers, and certainly in Dallas.

If we remove Kidd and Paul from their respective teams.

you're wrong. You can make a case that those Nets were more successful b/c they had an easier road but the Clippers were clearly more talented. Like way more talented (Jordan and Blake are clearly 2nd and 3rd best players on either team). Hell you could make the argument that the Hornets had more talent. Kidd was a shell of himself on Dallas. If we are going to compare later careers Paul is just twice the player regardless.

mightybosstone
08-11-2018, 09:35 AM
you're wrong. You can make a case that those Nets were more successful b/c they had an easier road but the Clippers were clearly more talented. Like way more talented (Jordan and Blake are clearly 2nd and 3rd best players on either team). Hell you could make the argument that the Hornets had more talent. Kidd was a shell of himself on Dallas. If we are going to compare later careers Paul is just twice the player regardless.

People are giving those Hornets teams a LOT of credit in this thread. Chris Paul made David West and Tyson Chandler. West wasn't remotely the same player without Paul than he was with him, and Paul turned Tyson Chandler into the hyperefficient offensive player he would remain through the rest of his prime in New York. But those guys as his No. 2 and No. 3 are pretty historically weak.

As for Kidd's Nets vs. Paul's Clippers, I'd definitely agree that the Clippers were more talented. But it wasn't a lack of talent that prevented them from advancing in the playoffs; it was the fact that they played in an insanely talented conference, while Kidd's Nets could skip their way through a dumpster fire that was the Eastern Conference in the early 2000s before Lebron was drafted and the Pistons really got going. If you put those Nets teams in the same conference as what Paul dealt with in LA, they would have been a first-round exit every year.

I look at what Paul dealt with in LA, and it reminds me a lot of what Tracy and Yao dealt with at their peak in Houston. That Rockets' duo was incredibly talented, but just like the Clippers, they simply weren't a very deep basketball team, and there were more talented, much deeper teams in the conference that prevented them from getting any further than they should.

One of my biggest "what ifs" as a Rockets fan is "What if Daryl Morey had been Houston's GM 2-3 years earlier or Yao and Tracy had stayed healthy 2-3 years longer?" Once Daryl got on board, he added so many guys that season who made Houston so dangerous and deep. But Tracy couldn't stay healthy that year, and Yao got hurt in that Lakers series. A big "what if" from that Clippers team should be, "What if they had a competent GM?" Doc is a solid coach, but he had no business running that team and made way too many bad decisions. In Paul's entire time there, they never had a single above average starting SF and outside of their big 3 and Redick, those teams always just felt woefully thin.

Jeffy25
08-11-2018, 10:11 AM
you're wrong. You can make a case that those Nets were more successful b/c they had an easier road but the Clippers were clearly more talented. Like way more talented (Jordan and Blake are clearly 2nd and 3rd best players on either team). Hell you could make the argument that the Hornets had more talent. Kidd was a shell of himself on Dallas. If we are going to compare later careers Paul is just twice the player regardless.

Yes, Blake and Griffin are better than West and Jefferson or whoever you want to say was the teams third best player.

But the talent drop from the 4th best down the roster I think really favors those Nets.

I dunno, I just always had the impression that Chris Paul played with nobody until really now (with Blake and Griffin being good, but not great players themselves) and that Kidd got to play with guys like Dirk, a young Jefferson, David West, etc.

I won't argue this one to death, my impression very well could be wrong.

basch152
08-11-2018, 12:09 PM
Yes, Blake and Griffin are better than West and Jefferson or whoever you want to say was the teams third best player.

But the talent drop from the 4th best down the roster I think really favors those Nets.

I dunno, I just always had the impression that Chris Paul played with nobody until really now (with Blake and Griffin being good, but not great players themselves) and that Kidd got to play with guys like Dirk, a young Jefferson, David West, etc.

I won't argue this one to death, my impression very well could be wrong.

blake and Griffin? lol

Chronz
08-11-2018, 01:24 PM
[QUOTE=Chronz;32498388]

I agree on the other hand his Clippers were a disappointment. Claiming that they shouldn't have won a playoff round makes you look like a homer.
When they didn't win a round they were injured, often without blake even playing. It's not homerism, its you not knowing how to gauge talent.

Jeffy25
08-11-2018, 02:30 PM
blake and Griffin? lol

Jordan and Griffin, typo

ewing
08-11-2018, 02:57 PM
[QUOTE=ewing;32498901]
When they didn't win a round they were injured, often without blake even playing. It's not homerism, its you not knowing how to gauge talent.

If, if, if


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

IKnowHoops
08-11-2018, 05:24 PM
Paul > Kidd

mightybosstone
08-11-2018, 08:02 PM
If, if, if


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Isn't your screen name based on one of the worst postseason performing superstars of all-time? Ewing's entire career is one giant "if." At least Paul's postseason numbers are legitimately strong. Ewing's on the other hand...

Brybmc868
08-11-2018, 08:04 PM
#1 Kevin Knox

ewing
08-11-2018, 10:06 PM
Isn't your screen name based on one of the worst postseason performing superstars of all-time? Ewing's entire career is one giant "if." At least Paul's postseason numbers are legitimately strong. Ewing's on the other hand...

Patrick came up short but got an incredible amount out of his talent and his teams outplayed their talent even though they came up short. Ewing's post season offensive numbers and some big big misses at big moments are legit criticisms. Like most guys that aren't pure scorers but forced to be #1s he shooting #s took a hit in the post season. Patrick should have been a #2. What didn't happen though was him losing over and over and again people having to say well your 8-11 guys are what really matters in the playoffs. Fortunately he was what you give KG credit for being on D.

Chronz
08-12-2018, 10:03 AM
[QUOTE=Chronz;32499084]

If, if, if


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Injuries matter

Chronz
08-12-2018, 10:06 AM
Patrick came up short but got an incredible amount out of his talent and his teams outplayed their talent even though they came up short. Ewing's post season offensive numbers and some big big misses at big moments are legit criticisms. Like most guys that aren't pure scorers but forced to be #1s he shooting #s took a hit in the post season. Patrick should have been a #2. What didn't happen though was him losing over and over and again people having to say well your 8-11 guys are what really matters in the playoffs. Fortunately he was what you give KG credit for being on D.

8 thru 11? Lmao r u just making **** up. It was his co star u Ewing homer. Ewing held his team's bacj

ewing
08-12-2018, 10:25 AM
8 thru 11? Lmao r u just making **** up. It was his co star u Ewing homer. Ewing held his team's bacj

The Knicks won series, went to the finals, the EFC finals, pushed the Bulls 7 and clearly wouldnít have if they were lead by John Starks. You are a fool. Iím willing to say Pat wasnít a pure scorrr and casting himin the role of one was a big hurdle for the Knicks. The Clippers were good enough to win a series. Maybe if they had a great point guard that knew how to lead a break they could have taken better advantage of their monster athletes and sharp shooters. But you canít be honest about CP3. The clippers underachieved.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Heediot
08-12-2018, 10:52 AM
I don't get the hate for Ewing. He didn't have anyone even considered a fringe all-star during the 90's. Riley tried to create a brusising team in the mold of the Pistons to see if that recipe can slow down MJ and the Bulls. Pistons had IT, and two allstar/fringe guys in Dumars and Laimbeer. He was a two way force, yeah he could of been more effective with efficiency, but even then he commanded respect and a lot of doubles which opened things up for his mates on offense. He led a great defense in the 90's/prime.

The amount of success he had with his cast is respectable IMO.

tredigs
08-12-2018, 10:52 AM
Yes, Blake and Griffin are better than West and Jefferson or whoever you want to say was the teams third best player.

But the talent drop from the 4th best down the roster I think really favors those Nets.

I dunno, I just always had the impression that Chris Paul played with nobody until really now (with Blake and Griffin being good, but not great players themselves) and that Kidd got to play with guys like Dirk, a young Jefferson, David West, etc.

I won't argue this one to death, my impression very well could be wrong.

Blake Griffin not great? That's one hell of a bar for greatness you've got. He was a borderline (sometimes clear) top 10 player for about half a decade there. Very much a 1a 1b scenario.

Chronz
08-12-2018, 10:54 AM
The Knicks won series, went to the finals, the EFC finals, pushed the Bulls 7 and clearly wouldnít have if they were lead by John Starks. You are a fool. Iím willing to say Pat wasnít a pure scorrr and casting himin the role of one was a big hurdle for the Knicks. The Clippers were good enough to win a series. Maybe if they had a great point guard that knew how to lead a break they could have taken better advantage of their monster athletes and sharp shooters. But you canít be honest about CP3. The clippers underachieved.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Any star could've gotten the same or more out of those squads. Imagine making the finals and nearly winning, except ur star that should take you to the promise land shoots in the 30s all series. That's one of the greatest choke jobs ever. Monster athletes? Which ones. Sharpshooters? Which ones. Lol we had 1 of each and were down the secondary star. Ewing would've gotten swept by those same squads. Good to see you ignore your 8 thru 11 bs, stick to facts and you'll get more out of ur talent, be more like cp3 than the choker u admire

Chronz
08-12-2018, 10:55 AM
I don't get the hate for Ewing. He didn't have anyone even considered a fringe all-star during the 90's. Riley tried to create a brusising team in the mold of the Pistons to see if that recipe can slow down MJ and the Bulls. Pistons had IT, and two allstar/fringe guys in Dumars and Laimbeer. He was a two way force, yeah he could of been more effective with efficiency, but even then he commanded respect and a lot of doubles which opened things up for his mates on offense. He led a great defense in the 90's/prime.

The amount of success he had with his cast is respectable IMO.
What hate? We just know his place. Funny how he led one of the greatest defenses ever yet didn't come close to dpoy. It's because everyone recognized the level of support he had on that end.

Heediot
08-12-2018, 10:56 AM
I'm going with Bill Russell here. His intangible, leadership, galvanizing abilities put it over for me. Ben Wallace with better offense and intangibles can be a critical piece to a championship team.

Chronz
08-12-2018, 10:58 AM
He was also a poor passer out of doubles so ...

ewing
08-12-2018, 11:16 AM
What hate? We just know his place. Funny how he led one of the greatest defenses ever yet didn't come close to dpoy. It's because everyone recognized the level of support he had on that end.

Yeah it was Charles Oakley and John Starks same thing at G-town. Has one guy ever gotten so lucky? I mean an historically great intimidating defensive that went to 3 finals in college then a historically great intimidating defensive that was the best in the NBA for at least half a decade. What a are the chances?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ewing
08-12-2018, 11:29 AM
I don't get the hate for Ewing. He didn't have anyone even considered a fringe all-star during the 90's. Riley tried to create a brusising team in the mold of the Pistons to see if that recipe can slow down MJ and the Bulls. Pistons had IT, and two allstar/fringe guys in Dumars and Laimbeer. He was a two way force, yeah he could of been more effective with efficiency, but even then he commanded respect and a lot of doubles which opened things up for his mates on offense. He led a great defense in the 90's/prime.

The amount of success he had with his cast is respectable IMO.

They were hated bc they made the game ugly. Canít credit Patrick for having great defensive instincts and as good a motor every night on D as anyone ever at his size. Riley just told them to fouled a lot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Chronz
08-12-2018, 02:22 PM
Yeah it was Charles Oakley and John Starks same thing at G-town. Has one guy ever gotten so lucky? I mean an historically great intimidating defensive that went to 3 finals in college then a historically great intimidating defensive that was the best in the NBA for at least half a decade. What a are the chances?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Lol college. Shame he wasted his most athletic days. Anyways it wasn't the same in the nba. He joined the Knicks and they didn't become a winning team until like 3 years later and they didn't become a historically elite defense until far later when Riley and his band of thugs came to town. Funny how you ignored the fact, that throughout that incredible run of defensive dominance, he made 1 all defensive second team. Yeah newsflash, everyone knew how stacked his squad was with defenders, its why even when he missed a ton of games years later with a diminishing cast they remained a team with a strong defense, hell even made the finals without the ol choker one year. So what we're left with is a 2 way guy who was never truly dominant on either end and failed his team's when they needed him most.

Good player but we're talking legendary level with cp3 here.

ewing
08-12-2018, 03:46 PM
Lol college. Shame he wasted his most athletic days. Anyways it wasn't the same in the nba. He joined the Knicks and they didn't become a winning team until like 3 years later and they didn't become a historically elite defense until far later when Riley and his band of thugs came to town. Funny how you ignored the fact, that throughout that incredible run of defensive dominance, he made 1 all defensive second team. Yeah newsflash, everyone knew how stacked his squad was with defenders, its why even when he missed a ton of games years later with a diminishing cast they remained a team with a strong defense, hell even made the finals without the ol choker one year. So what we're left with is a 2 way guy who was never truly dominant on either end and failed his team's when they needed him most.

Good player but we're talking legendary level with cp3 here.

Yeah shame Paul actually had to play against decent teams in the post season. Its not fair when you have to play other playoff teams in the playoffs


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Chronz
08-12-2018, 04:25 PM
Yeah shame Paul actually had to play against decent teams in the post season. Its not fair when you have to play other playoff teams in the playoffs


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You gotta play someone to have a game guy

nastynice
08-13-2018, 07:53 PM
I don't get the hate for Ewing. He didn't have anyone even considered a fringe all-star during the 90's. Riley tried to create a brusising team in the mold of the Pistons to see if that recipe can slow down MJ and the Bulls. Pistons had IT, and two allstar/fringe guys in Dumars and Laimbeer. He was a two way force, yeah he could of been more effective with efficiency, but even then he commanded respect and a lot of doubles which opened things up for his mates on offense. He led a great defense in the 90's/prime.

The amount of success he had with his cast is respectable IMO.

Starks was all star level a few years. Knicks were good, they made deep runs, lost some close hard fought series.

The more time passes and I think of that early and mid 90's team, the more a positive light I see them in. I love that style, mentally tough, straight ****in bruisers.