Jordan is the greatest player of all time. Magic Johnson might be #2. I could see Larry Bird in the top 5, but not above either of those guys. Please.
Jordan is the greatest player of all time. Magic Johnson might be #2. I could see Larry Bird in the top 5, but not above either of those guys. Please.
Wendell Gee wrote:
I think it's fair to say that those three plus Wilt are the four best of all time. Picking any one of those four is reasonable. For anyone else, ask yourself if they are better than the one among those four that plays their position (calling Wilt PF/C). I'd have a hard time with anyone except Oscar R or Hakeem.
.
I think that this ^ is a pretty good summary although I admit my perspective is limited to only as far back as Kareem and The Doctor.
I would put Jordan above everyone else I have seen. Wilt has to be considered for GOAT based on his amazing stats but I never really saw him so I can't really say for sure.
Among today's players Lebron could be up there if not for the rather glaring weakness of disappearing at times during the playoffs, especially when the game is on the line. If he manages to get past that and starts dominating tough playoff series and racking up several titles then he becomes part of the conversation. Without that he is just a footnote.
Wendell Gee wrote:
Ha, ha. Unless you want defensive highlights.
No I don't.
Who's would you like to see.
Walt Frazier (who was a great player)and on the all defensive team the year Pete scored 68 points against him in the playoffs. I know, Pete was guarding him and gave up 27 points due to lack of defensive skills.
mellon wrote:
Wendell Gee wrote:Ha, ha. Unless you want defensive highlights.
No I don't.
Who's would you like to see.
Walt Frazier (who was a great player)and on the all defensive team the year Pete scored 68 points against him in the playoffs. I know, Pete was guarding him and gave up 27 points due to lack of defensive skills.
I'm not knocking Pete Maravich as a player, he was awesome to watch in college and pros, just a joke.
Dr. J is always fun to watch. As far as defensive highlights, a good shot-blocker can be fun, like Hakeem or Dikembe "Who wants to sex Mutombo?" Mutombo. I wish there were some great Russell highlight films.
To the previous poster: I agree on LeBron. He'll get the playoff accolades eventually, but until then he's 2nd tier. Even then I'll be surprised if he moves past Bird at SF, but it could happen.
I have to put Russell ahead of Jordan -- look at the rings. He & Jordan are head & shoulders above anyone else in terms of hating to lose. Bird & Magic are great, great, great, but below those two. Kobe is the only one currently whom I think has that kind of hating to lose to go with that level of skills.
In terms of pure talent, you'd have to look at players like Oscar Robertson, Elgin Baylor, Jerry West, Dr. J, LeBron, and there's never been another NBA athlete anything like Wilt -- but they're not in the same category as the previous five above. Maybe they were on the wrong teams, maybe they loved to win but didn't hate to lose as much; hard to say.
Folks, this is the new nba with players stronger and more agile than ever. A Bird in his prime may be lucky to get 6 points a game in this era. What could he bench back then? Most nowadays can bench over 450.
Madras dem wrote:
Folks, this is the new nba with players stronger and more agile than ever. A Bird in his prime may be lucky to get 6 points a game in this era. What could he bench back then? Most nowadays can bench over 450.
What many of you fail to realize is that today's athletes have access to new training facilities, equipment, technology, and nutrient supplements that a lot players from the 80's era didn't have. What if Bird, Magic, Mchale, Jabber, Moses Malone, Pistol Pete and Dr. J had the same advantages as most of todays players? I think they would be just as strong, run just as fast, and jump just as high.
FYI. NBAers were lifting weights in the 80s. They had fantasic WOs
How strong do you have to be to play basketball, benching 350 or 450 makes no difference playing the game.
Players in the 80s had pretty much the same physical tools as today.
You sound like your 20 years old
Madras dem wrote:
Folks, this is the new nba with players stronger and more agile than ever. A Bird in his prime may be lucky to get 6 points a game in this era. What could he bench back then? Most nowadays can bench over 450.
Here's the thing, can they shoot free throws around 90%? Can they shoot 3 pointers at 38%? Is their field goal percentage 50% Can they take the ball the length of the court and have the court sense to feed someone behind them for an easy lay up? Can they look one way and pass another? Can they shoot, dribble, and pass with either hand? Can they make game winning shots in people's faces even when everyone knows that they will be taking the shot?
Here's one of those weakling midgets from the 50's and 60's:
Some teeny boppers are questioning if Bird could play TODAY... how 'bout giving serious thought to what some of TODAY'S stars would do if they had to play according to 80s rules. Hand checking... no palming and carrying over your dribble... no holding the dribble on your hip... no fruity hopscotch hop steps... Dribble driving is so much easier now... setting yourself for a jumper is so much easier because you can catch the ball, then hop, the shoot---------no worrying about catching, gathering yourself without dragging your pivot foot, then squaring up.
I doubt the 20-somethings even know about all the help today's offensive players are getting.
LeBron James would have 12 turnovers per game if they enforced 80s rules.
The Boston Celtics with all those 'HOF' players...
1979-79 no Larry= 29-53
1979-80 with Larry= 61-21
1987-88 with Larry= 57-25
1988-89 no Larry*= 24-28 then they traded for frontcourt help
1990-91 no Larry= 10-12
1990-91 with Larry= 46-14
1991-92 no Larry= 20-17
1991-92 with Larry= 31-14
*they had 'banged up Larry' for 6 games.
You gotta wonder what McHale's and Parish's legacies would be with no Larry Bird.
No Larry= 83-110
With Larry= 195-74
Pro-rated no Larry= 35-47
Pro-rated with Larry= 60-22
The dude's impact on winning games was unreal.
LOL at 'most players can bench 450 lbs today'. Dwight Howard, who might be one of the strongest-looking of the players said in a Q & A that he benches 275. Most of these players have exceptionally long arms, which is not conducive to having a high bench max. And having a strong bench is NOT a prerequisite for strength in any basketball-specific skill.
Nighthawk wrote:
LOL at 'most players can bench 450 lbs today'. Dwight Howard, who might be one of the strongest-looking of the players said in a Q & A that he benches 275. Most of these players have exceptionally long arms, which is not conducive to having a high bench max. And having a strong bench is NOT a prerequisite for strength in any basketball-specific skill.
I'm glad you pointed this out. Anyone who thinks that's true is an idiot.
Nighthawk wrote:
Some teeny boppers are questioning if Bird could play TODAY... how 'bout giving serious thought to what some of TODAY'S stars would do if they had to play according to 80s rules. Hand checking... no palming and carrying over your dribble... no holding the dribble on your hip... no fruity hopscotch hop steps... Dribble driving is so much easier now... setting yourself for a jumper is so much easier because you can catch the ball, then hop, the shoot---------no worrying about catching, gathering yourself without dragging your pivot foot, then squaring up.
I doubt the 20-somethings even know about all the help today's offensive players are getting.
Good to see that some remember when picking up the ball while dribbling and then continuing to dribble was considered a double dribble. Also when jumping with the ball in your hands and then landing with it still in your hands was considered "up and down" or traveling. Not too mention taking three steps with the ball in your hands prior to taking your shot was also considered traveling.
At any rate, anyone who thinks Bird would be less than a superstar in today's NBA has no idea what they are talking about.
fwiw wrote:
I'd give a slight edge to Magic over Bird - count the rings. MJ obviously tops. Wilt, Russell and Big O have claims also to the very top.
I really don't see how Shaq can in any way be considered even the best center - he's behind Russell, Wilt, Kareem and Hakeem - maybe even Mikan, ha ha. He can't be the best if they have to take him out close games because the other team will just foul him and he'll miss at least one of the free throws.
Until LeBron wins something he's not in the top 10, probably not even top 15 or 20. As much as I hate to say it, Kobe really does have to be counted up there now - certainly top 10. He wouldn't be on your starting 5 though.
You just contradicted yourself. You say Magic is better because of rings, but you cite Kareem (his teammate) as one of the best ever. It is much easier to get rings with two all-time greats than with just one.
very biased answer here, being a sycamore myself. I think larry is the greatest of all time
if Wilt, Jerry West, and Elgin Baylor are considered 3 of the top 10 players of all time how come they couldn't win a championship together?
syc 'em boy wrote:
very biased answer here, being a sycamore myself. I think larry is the greatest of all time
WC did not join JW and EB until the 68/69 season. At that point he was 7 years past his most productive season, as was EB.
It's like the situation when Karl Malone and Gary Payton were on the same team as Shaq and Kobe. Not as extreme, but the same basic situation - these guys were well past their prime before they got together.
