Any Disagreement about the Top 12?

[cms11]

I put them in alphabetical order to avoid the ranking arguments. What I'm interested in is whether there's any one else to deserves to be in the top 12?

Kareem Abdul Jabbar
Larry Bird
Kobe Bryant
Wilt Chamberlain
Stephen Curry
Tim Duncan
Lebron James
Magic Johnson
Michael Jordan
Hakeem Olajuwon
Shaquille O'Neal
Bill Russell

[asujbl]

Not from me

[boxbuster7]

Can't believe you left out kwame brown

smh

[hermanotarjeta]

That sounds just right.

[maj78]

Good-looking list!

[Above the Rim]

Who knows how many more accolades he will acquire. Let him finish out his career, then we get to better digest his career stats. But Jokic is one of only 3 players in NBA history to have a top 2 MVP finish for 5 or more consecutive seasons.

[eastbayak]

Smart move to make it a top 12 to include Kobe and Hakeem.

[asujbl]

Smart move to make it a top 12 to include Kobe and Hakeem.

Hakeem and Curry

But I see what you did there

[pingbling23]

Player or career? I would give the edge player wise to joker over curry and slight edge career to curry.

[Above the Rim]

As a Laker homer, I gotta plug Jerry West. If he had the 3-point line, OMG !

[hermanotarjeta]

Hakeem and Curry

But I see what you did there

This guy is right.

[CKB]

Missing Bob Cousy.

[Zedlaw]

I agree with the list but it’s interesting how much Oscar has fallen off in the consensus and Hakeem has grown.

[the mesiah]

As a Laker homer, I gotta plug Jerry West. If he had the 3-point line, OMG !

Who you leaving off ?

[mikejones]

List is wrong. Barkley fleer rookie sells for more than Hakeem so I'd swap those two.:D

[eastbayak]

As a Laker homer, I gotta plug Jerry West. If he had the 3-point line, OMG !

Who you leaving off ?

If using a top 12, that's easy. Kobe or Hakeem (probably Kobe too).

Unsure if he cracks the top 10 list though.

[Above the Rim]

My family grew up in SoCal. My parents went to Lakers games - saw Wilt, West, Elgin Baylor. With my folks we saw Magic era, Kobe/Shaq.

From what my dad says, West was unquestionably a better shooter than Kobe. West was a sniper, great Defense, heck - won Finals MVP for losing team. Kobe was awesome, great, top flight defense. But a volume shooter.

Yes, is debateable, but my dad said he would always take Jerry West over Kobe. So, kill me if you want, but take West over Kobe.

[cms11]

I agree with the list but it’s interesting how much Oscar has fallen off in the consensus and Hakeem has grown.

Oscar is a really tough one to fit in.

[hermanotarjeta]

Oscar is a really tough one to fit in.

The main reason he is being left off is he only has one ring.

[rats60]

I put them in alphabetical order to avoid the ranking arguments. What I'm interested in is whether there's any one else to deserves to be in the top 12?

Kareem Abdul Jabbar
Larry Bird
Kobe Bryant
Wilt Chamberlain
Stephen Curry
Tim Duncan
Lebron James
Magic Johnson
Michael Jordan
Hakeem Olajuwon
Shaquille O'Neal
Bill Russell

Drop Curry, Shaq and Olajuwon.

Add Jokic, Big O and West

[rats60]

The main reason he is being left off is he only has one ring.

It is hard for one guy to beat a team with 8 or 9 Hall of Famers on it.

[hermanotarjeta]

It is hard for one guy to beat a team with 8 or 9 Hall of Famers on it.

It’s also hard to beat a team with Jordan on it.

But that’s why Malone, Ewing, Barkley, etc are nowhere close to this list.

[CommomSensei88]

Hakeem and Curry

But I see what you did there

Curry and Kobe

[CommomSensei88]

Kevin Durant?

[hermanotarjeta]

Kevin Durant?

He would be top 16.

[blackvodka]

That mostly would be my top 12. I am a little iffy on Shaq, but I'm probably in the minority on that one.

The next three honorable mentions for me would be:
Big O
The logo
Rabbit

Then after that you have about ten to twelve other guys that are firmly cemented in the next tier (Dr J, Durant, Moses, Admiral, Giannis, Garnett, Joker, Zeke, Dirk etc...)

Malone and Barkley are there talent wise, but they don't have a ring.

Sent from my motorola razr 2024 using Tapatalk

[CommomSensei88]

You Forgot Charles Barkley.
He should be in every top 12.
He is soooo popular and soooo Kool. :cool::cool::cool:

[rnocards]

No disagreement.

I wanted West to fit in there somewhere, considering he's the logoman and all, but all the others are worthy of being there. I guess I'd put him at #13.

[fabiani12333]

Player or career? I would give the edge player wise to joker over curry and slight edge career to curry.

Jokic is currently the best all-around offensive player in the league, but Curry transformed the league with his shooting. Plus, he was able to lead the Warriors to a championship post-Durant and post-Klay injury.

[pingbling23]

Jokic is currently the best all-around offensive player in the league, but Curry transformed the league with his shooting. Plus, he was able to lead the Warriors to a championship post-Durant and post-Klay injury.

One could argue the transformation has been to the detriment of the nba, and it’s leaked into and poisoned the youth game. Steph’s last title definitely cemented his legacy but it wasn’t an impressive statement. Beat a Murray less nuggets first round, round 2 beat a grizzlies squad with morant out half the series and bane being a shell of himself with a bad back, and beat unproven mavericks and then unproven Celtics (Tatum frankly choked). I get it, you have to beat who’s in front of you and the warriors did that. Steph did have a great finals that year. Joker hasn’t been blessed with curry’s situation and it will negatively effect his career legacy.

[fabiani12333]

One could argue the transformation has been to the detriment of the nba, and it’s leaked into and poisoned the youth game. Steph’s last title definitely cemented his legacy but it wasn’t an impressive statement. Beat a Murray less nuggets first round, round 2 beat a grizzlies squad with morant out half the series and bane being a shell of himself with a bad back, and beat unproven mavericks and then unproven Celtics (Tatum frankly choked). I get it, you have to beat who’s in front of you and the warriors did that. Steph did have a great finals that year. Joker hasn’t been blessed with curry’s situation and it will negatively effect his career legacy.

I mean, many thought Curry and the Warriors' championship-contending days were over with in 2022. He had missed most of the 2019-20 season with an injury, and the Warriors missed the playoffs in 2020-21. Klay was no longer the same player. The fact that Curry led a team of role players to a championship, even with playoff luck, is pretty impressive.

He transformed the league by forcing players to be able to shoot well from three to compete. If it has ruined the game, it is the NBA's fault for not adjusting the rules to make it harder or less beneficial for players to chuck threes all game long.

[Ismael80]

As a Laker homer, I gotta plug Jerry West. If he had the 3-point line, OMG !

Sure he's the logo but you can't put a guy who lost 8 times in the NBA finals in the top 12. C'mon.

[rhigh2390]

I mean, many thought Curry and the Warriors' championship-contending days were over with in 2022. He had missed most of the 2019-20 season with an injury, and the Warriors missed the playoffs in 2020-21. Klay was no longer the same player. The fact that Curry led a team of role players to a championship, even with playoff luck, is pretty impressive.

He transformed the league by forcing players to be able to shoot well from three to compete. If it has ruined the game, it is the NBA's fault for not adjusting the rules to make it harder or less beneficial for players to chuck threes all game long.

Exactly. He had Andrew Wiggins as his #2 and won a title. It's impressive no matter how you slice it.

[rhigh2390]

Sure he's the logo but you can't put a guy who lost 8 times in the NBA finals in the top 12. C'mon.

Some people can. Heck, a lot of people have a guy that has lost 6 times as their goat lol


The top 12 list though is pretty solid and I think most would agree. Of course there are honorable mentions, but overall, it's good.

[Ismael80]

Some people can. Heck, a lot of people have a guy that has lost 6 times as their goat lol

LOL touché

The top 12 list though is pretty solid and I think most would agree. Of course there are honorable mentions, but overall, it's good.

Agree. Solid list

[sheetskout]

I don't know how you can't have Jokic on that list at this point.

[pingbling23]

I mean, many thought Curry and the Warriors' championship-contending days were over with in 2022. He had missed most of the 2019-20 season with an injury, and the Warriors missed the playoffs in 2020-21. Klay was no longer the same player. The fact that Curry led a team of role players to a championship, even with playoff luck, is pretty impressive.

He transformed the league by forcing players to be able to shoot well from three to compete. If it has ruined the game, it is the NBA's fault for not adjusting the rules to make it harder or less beneficial for players to chuck threes all game long.

I was definitely one of them that didn’t think they would compete anymore and they proved me wrong. It was nice to see Steph excel in the finals and earn mvp. Take a look back at that title run in the playoffs. There was a ton of help from klay and Poole not to mention the all around play from Wiggins and draymond. I don’t think a rule change is necessary. We see it all the time when teams stop living and dying by the 3 and get high percentage inside and midrange shots they can be just as competitive. Add in a reasonable mixture of the 3 and it’s a solid product. It just gets boring seeing teams shoot 200 3s a game and taking bad or ill times 3s at that.

[cms11]

That mostly would be my top 12. I am a little iffy on Shaq, but I'm probably in the minority on that one.

The next three honorable mentions for me would be:
Big O
The logo
Rabbit

Then after that you have about ten to twelve other guys that are firmly cemented in the next tier (Dr J, Durant, Moses, Admiral, Giannis, Garnett, Joker, Zeke, Dirk etc...)

Malone and Barkley are there talent wise, but they don't have a ring.

Sent from my motorola razr 2024 using Tapatalk

I really don't like having 5 centers in the top 12, so if I were to drop one it would be Shaq to replace him with West. The edge for me over Oscar is West's defense.

[cms11]

I don't know how you can't have Jokic on that list at this point.

One more title and he will be. I can't put someone with only one Finals appearance in the top 12.

[calmar]

Drop Curry, Shaq and Olajuwon.

Add Jokic, Big O and West

If you're going to drop three players, Kobe has to be one of them. He is the most overrated player of all time, and any clear-eyed NBA observer knows this.

In three of his title seasons and playoff runs his performance was well below Shaq's, and in the other two his performance was not that much better than Gasol's. Look at the actual advanced stats, not image, style, "Mamba" mentality, etc.

And if you look at how his actual career stats compare to other players -- again, not image, style, or his reputation, but documented performance -- it is rough. Kobe benefitted tremendously from playing in the era just before analytics fully emerged. For instance, all three of the following go-to advanced stats, on their own, are imperfect (as all advanced stats are). But they somehow each make the same case, and when you put them together that case is basically inarguable. In Player Efficiency Rating, Box Plus/Minus, and Win Shares Per 48 Minutes, this is where Kobe ranks all time:

PER Regular Season: 31st
PER Playoffs: 26th
Box +/- Regular Season: 33rd
Box +/- Playoffs: 29th
WS/48 Regular Season: 66th
WS/48 Playoffs: 55th

And good lord, those who reference his clutch gene and big game heroics, etc. etc. might want to look at where he lands on the NBA Playoffs Clutch Shooting list for the modern era (spoiler: way, way down on that list).

Two things can be equally true. Kobe was a great player, and we tragically lost him way, way too soon. AND he was not as good as his reputation and legend.

[cms11]

One could argue the transformation has been to the detriment of the nba, and it’s leaked into and poisoned the youth game. Steph’s last title definitely cemented his legacy but it wasn’t an impressive statement. Beat a Murray less nuggets first round, round 2 beat a grizzlies squad with morant out half the series and bane being a shell of himself with a bad back, and beat unproven mavericks and then unproven Celtics (Tatum frankly choked). I get it, you have to beat who’s in front of you and the warriors did that. Steph did have a great finals that year. Joker hasn’t been blessed with curry’s situation and it will negatively effect his career legacy.

Tatum had a below average series, but I wouldn't call it choking. Had GSW lost, people would have pointed at Steph's 0-9 from 3 in Game 4 and labeled him a choker. Instead he was bailed out by GP2's nearly perfect game with 3 steals.

[Beavers98]

Pretty solid list. You could make arguments for others, but solid...

[6celtics33]

If you're going to drop three players, Kobe has to be one of them. He is the most overrated player of all time, and any clear-eyed NBA observer knows this.

In three of his title seasons and playoff runs his performance was well below Shaq's, and in the other two his performance was not that much better than Gasol's. Look at the actual advanced stats, not image, style, "Mamba" mentality, etc.

And if you look at how his actual career stats compare to other players -- again, not image, style, or his reputation, but documented performance -- it is rough. Kobe benefitted tremendously from playing in the era just before analytics fully emerged. For instance, all three of the following go-to advanced stats, on their own, are imperfect (as all advanced stats are). But they somehow each make the same case, and when you put them together that case is basically inarguable. In Player Efficiency Rating, Box Plus/Minus, and Win Shares Per 48 Minutes, this is where Kobe ranks all time:

PER Regular Season: 31st
PER Playoffs: 26th
Box +/- Regular Season: 33rd
Box +/- Playoffs: 29th
WS/48 Regular Season: 66th
WS/48 Playoffs: 55th

And good lord, those who reference his clutch gene and big game heroics, etc. etc. might want to look at where he lands on the NBA Playoffs Clutch Shooting list for the modern era (spoiler: way, way down on that list).

Two things can be equally true. Kobe was a great player, and we tragically lost him way, way too soon. AND he was not as good as his reputation and legend.

Agreed. I’d say most overrated player ever. Before death and post retirement I saw lists with him in the 10-15 range. Post death people act like it’s top 5 locked and a trio with LeBron and Jordan. Kobe was competitive and worked hard and played hurt. Those qualities we miss as fans based on the game as it is today. But against historical peers, I agree with you. It’s ridiculous.

[Asian62150]

If you're going to drop three players, Kobe has to be one of them. He is the most overrated player of all time, and any clear-eyed NBA observer knows this.

And good lord, those who reference his clutch gene and big game heroics, etc. etc. might want to look at where he lands on the NBA Playoffs Clutch Shooting list for the modern era (spoiler: way, way down on that list).

Two things can be equally true. Kobe was a great player, and we tragically lost him way, way too soon. AND he was not as good as his reputation and legend.

Agreed. I’d say most overrated player ever. Before death and post retirement I saw lists with him in the 10-15 range. Post death people act like it’s top 5 locked and a trio with LeBron and Jordan. Kobe was competitive and worked hard and played hurt. Those qualities we miss as fans based on the game as it is today. But against historical peers, I agree with you. It’s ridiculous.

100%. Take emotion out (difficult esp. for the legion of Laker fans) and this is what you get.

Kobe worked his tail off and earned respect for that. He also was a leader on the 2008 Redeem Team and taught the next generation how to really work on their craft.

But if you just take into account on-court play, he's not as great and most make him out to be. And for most of his career, he was a reclusive, stand-offish teammate.

[rats60]

Sure he's the logo but you can't put a guy who lost 8 times in the NBA finals in the top 12. C'mon.

Sure you can. Rings mean nothing for individuals. Those are team accomplishments. No one has mentioned the guy who was 8-0 in the Finals and was the best player on 4 of those teams. He was even an All Defensive team regular, but "no defense" Curry is top 12? Lol. If rings mattered, he would be top 3 on every all-time list.

[rats60]

If you're going to drop three players, Kobe has to be one of them. He is the most overrated player of all time, and any clear-eyed NBA observer knows this.

In three of his title seasons and playoff runs his performance was well below Shaq's, and in the other two his performance was not that much better than Gasol's. Look at the actual advanced stats, not image, style, "Mamba" mentality, etc.

And if you look at how his actual career stats compare to other players -- again, not image, style, or his reputation, but documented performance -- it is rough. Kobe benefitted tremendously from playing in the era just before analytics fully emerged. For instance, all three of the following go-to advanced stats, on their own, are imperfect (as all advanced stats are). But they somehow each make the same case, and when you put them together that case is basically inarguable. In Player Efficiency Rating, Box Plus/Minus, and Win Shares Per 48 Minutes, this is where Kobe ranks all time:

PER Regular Season: 31st
PER Playoffs: 26th
Box +/- Regular Season: 33rd
Box +/- Playoffs: 29th
WS/48 Regular Season: 66th
WS/48 Playoffs: 55th

And good lord, those who reference his clutch gene and big game heroics, etc. etc. might want to look at where he lands on the NBA Playoffs Clutch Shooting list for the modern era (spoiler: way, way down on that list).

Two things can be equally true. Kobe was a great player, and we tragically lost him way, way too soon. AND he was not as good as his reputation and legend.

And you completely ignore his impact on the defensive end. That is why he is on my list. Curry and Shaq have no business anywhere near the top 12. If you want to say Hakeem over Kobe, I wouldn't argue with that. Kobe is definitely at the bottom.

[calmar]

And you completely ignore his impact on the defensive end. That is why he is on my list. Curry and Shaq have no business anywhere near the top 12. If you want to say Hakeem over Kobe, I wouldn't argue with that. Kobe is definitely at the bottom.

Sorry, but every one of those stats factors in defense. It's a player's whole contribution with his play on the court. Kobe's defense was the most overrated area of his game.

His career average Defensive Box +/- was -0.1. And despite being in the top-10 of NBA Defensive Rating only once in his whole career (and that was at #10, in 2000), he made 12 All-Defense 1st or 2nd Teams. He made several All-Defense 1st Teams when the stats showed he wasn't even a top-20 defender in the league.

[nbahobbyaddict]

Kevin Durant?

My first thought.

[yiguiri2002]

It's a good list but Top 12 might be the easiest to do in the NBA.

[mwf94]

If this is in terms of card liquidity, drop Duncan and add Iverson

[Ismael80]

Sure you can. Rings mean nothing for individuals. Those are team accomplishments. No one has mentioned the guy who was 8-0 in the Finals and was the best player on 4 of those teams. He was even an All Defensive team regular, but "no defense" Curry is top 12? Lol. If rings mattered, he would be top 3 on every all-time list.

Wait, what? LOL

Of course they are team accomplishments but it means everything to a player's career and legacies. What are we doing here?1?1 lol

[Asian62150]

Wait, what? LOL

Of course they are team accomplishments but it means everything to a player's career and legacies. What are we doing here?1?1 lol

Yeah, I'll agree to disagree with rats there.

I don't think they mean everything, but they definitely don't mean nothing.

If your goal as an athlete is to win, rings are a huge accomplishment and a validation that your hard work paid off and you likely made bonds on that team that will last a lifetime.

[blackvodka]

Sure you can. Rings mean nothing for individuals. Those are team accomplishments. No one has mentioned the guy who was 8-0 in the Finals and was the best player on 4 of those teams. He was even an All Defensive team regular, but "no defense" Curry is top 12? Lol. If rings mattered, he would be top 3 on every all-time list.You're just never going to have a team like the 60's Celtics that are that unworldly dominant for that long that prevents literally everyone else from winning. That's the core reason I don't hold West, Elgin or even Wilt for their lack of hardware.

Sent from my motorola razr 2024 using Tapatalk

[rats60]

Wait, what? LOL

Of course they are team accomplishments but it means everything to a player's career and legacies. What are we doing here?1?1 lol

It is meaningless when you cherry pick who you are going to give credit to for winning rings.

[RKH916]

I love Curry but I've never understood how people have him in the Top 10, let alone above Kobe and Magic.

[the mesiah]

I love Curry but I've never understood how people have him in the Top 10, let alone above Kobe and Magic.

Recency bias plus about 98% of the people on here never seen Magic play that’s why ..

[calmar]

I love Curry but I've never understood how people have him in the Top 10, let alone above Kobe and Magic.
Above Magic makes no sense, above Kobe does. He has a better career PER, Box +/-, and WS/48, plus better career playoff stats. His eFG% is literally 10% points higher than Kobe's was (58% to 48%), and his defensive stats are even better than Kobe's, despite each player's reputation. Also a much better teammate.

[Above the Rim]

Don't understand how Curry can be in Top 10 ? It might be that many consider him the greatest shooter ever.

[williemayshayes]

Jokic has a higher average career PER than Kobe has ever had for a single season.
Jokic is the all-time leader in Average Career PER.
Jokic has a higher Defensive Win Shares average than Kobe.

His BLACK INK is staggering to look at. He is an analytic nightmare.

[jcardstore]

I love Curry but I've never understood how people have him in the Top 10, let alone above Kobe and Magic.

I've never seen someone rank him about Magic but he's absolutely had a better career and legacy than Kobe. Curry is better than Kobe in every single metric you can find

[yiguiri2002]

I've never seen someone rank him about Magic but he's absolutely had a better career and legacy than Kobe. Curry is better than Kobe in every single metric you can find

I was in the Curry = Kobe boat until recently, now I think he still needs a few things to catch him.

Not rings or MVP/FMVPs. Just a few All-Stars, All-NBA (even 3rd team) but specially numbers. Kobe's biggest things was his durability and he's miles away from Steph in that area.

[the mesiah]

I was in the Curry = Kobe boat until recently, now I think he still needs a few things to catch him.

Not rings or MVP/FMVPs. just a few all stars All-NBA (even 3rd team) but specially numbers. Kobe's biggest things was his durability and he's miles away from Steph in that area.





That’s what’s crazy and wrong about these types of threads and talks ..people value more “fan voted/ popularity all stars than actual rings/mvps/final mvps that can be proven on the court :doh: I know that’s the way most society is now it seems

[calmar]

That’s what’s crazy and wrong about these types of threads and talks ..people value more “fan voted/ popularity all stars than actual rings/mvps/final mvps that can be proven on the court :doh: I know that’s the way most society is now it seems

I hear you, but MVPs and Finals MVPs are not much better than fan voting. Narratives, reputations, and fatigue with repeat winners frequently get in the way of rewarding the best performance.

[yiguiri2002]

That’s what’s crazy and wrong about these types of threads and talks ..people value more “fan voted/ popularity all stars than actual rings/mvps/final mvps that can be proven on the court :doh: I know that’s the way most society is now it seems

I don't know if you are agreeing or disagreeing with me in Kobe v Steph

[the mesiah]

I hear you, but MVPs and Finals MVPs are not much better than fan voting. Narratives, reputations, and fatigue with repeat winners frequently get in the way of rewarding the best performance.

So just to get this straight ..you prefer all star fan voting popularity contest winners over Finals Mvps/Regualr season Mvps when determining all time top 10-12 lists ?

[eastbayak]

So just to get this straight ..you prefer all star fan voting popularity contest winners over Finals Mvps/Regualr season Mvps when determining all time top 10-12 lists ?

Lol, Kobe won the 09-10 Finals MVP shooting 40.5%. Curry didn't even win Finals MVP in 14-15 when he was the best Warrior (shot 44.3%, averaged 26 points).

Across 37 Finals games, Kobe averaged 25.3 points with 41.2% (FG %). Across 34 Finals games, Curry averaged 27.3 points with a 43.2% (FG%).

That’s what’s crazy and wrong about these types of threads and talks ..people don't know simple stats.

[jcardstore]

Lol, Kobe won the 09-10 Finals MVP shooting 40.5%. Curry didn't even win Finals MVP in 14-15 when he was the best Warrior (shot 44.3%, averaged 26 points).

Across 37 Finals games, Kobe averaged 25.3 points with 41.2% (FG %). Across 34 Finals games, Curry averaged 27.3 points with a 43.2% (FG%).

That’s what’s crazy and wrong about these types of threads and talks ..people don't know simple stats.

Not that they don't know, they don't care. The Kobe fans especially reject anything that doesn't fit the narrative

[jcardstore]

I was in the Curry = Kobe boat until recently, now I think he still needs a few things to catch him.

Not rings or MVP/FMVPs. Just a few All-Stars, All-NBA (even 3rd team) but specially numbers. Kobe's biggest things was his durability and he's miles away from Steph in that area.

I think if you look at the totality of the career and legacy Kobe isn't even close.

Steph changed the game of basketball, that alone puts him over the top for me. Accolades-wise they're neck and neck

[eastbayak]

Not that they don't know, they don't care. The Kobe fans especially reject anything that doesn't fit the narrative

Rejecting logic is crazy to me!

[yiguiri2002]

I think if you look at the totality of the career and legacy Kobe isn't even close.

Steph changed the game of basketball, that alone puts him over the top for me. Accolades-wise they're neck and neck

I think it depends on what you value most.

I used to have peak performance (season/s) higher and continued excellence lower. I've gone the other way around on this the past few years, that's why I have Kobe over Steph (at least for now).

I don't think they are neck and neck on accolades though. Kobe has way more 1st Team All-NBA berths.

[jcardstore]

I think it depends on what you value most.

I used to have peak performance (season/s) higher and continued excellence lower. I've gone the other way around on this the past few years, that's why I have Kobe over Steph (at least for now).

I don't think they are neck and neck on accolades though. Kobe has way more 1st Team All-NBA berths.

That's definitely true. Not that it's worth anything in this discussion but I think a few of Kobe's 1st teams (especially defense) are a product of just having relatively poor talent in the NBA compared to today. For example - 03-04 Kobe gets 1st team on a season that if it were today (even if you inflate the counting stats) might not even be a 3rd team season.

The 2000s imo was by far the worst era in basketball history. The talent was lacking, the game style was terrible, viewership was low...

[ninjacookies]

Kobe was bathed in the eternal Lakers glow.

Brutal if true.

Yep, definitely true.


He wouldn't have 1/5th his halo legacy if he accomplished the same with Charlotte.


Meanwhile, nobody in north america or asia cared about the Warriors pre-steph.

If Steph were a Laker? We wouldn't even be having this discussion.

[JWBlue]

Players I could see coming off the list :

Shaq

Kobe (I know I am going to get a lot of crap for this).


Players justifiably could be added to the list :

Joker

Oscar Robertson

West

[rnocards]

Kobe belongs up there.

His Airness the GOAT said that Kobe is the only player who could beat him one-on-one.

So, he belongs.

[Gary]

Im gong to aproch this from the same angle as i would who do you take to start a franchise with the goal being championships.ill take 2 guys from all 5 positions and the remaining 2 will be guys id like to take but didn't get into the top 2 at their position.

Center Russell,Wilt
PF.....Duncan,Elvin Hayes (yes he played both 4-5)
SF....Baylor,Bird
SG..Mike,Kobe
PG..Magic..Stockton
last 2...West,Kareem

My list doesnt claim these are the best 12 players ever.....its a list of who i think gives me the best chance at a championship.....guys like Malone,James,Curry,AI,ScottieBarkely ect ect all great players better than several on my list.My players all have 1 common quality......they made everyone else better.

[jcardstore]

Im gong to aproch this from the same angle as i would who do you take to start a franchise with the goal being championships.ill take 2 guys from all 5 positions and the remaining 2 will be guys id like to take but didn't get into the top 2 at their position.

Center Russell,Wilt
PF.....Duncan,Elvin Hayes (yes he played both 4-5)
SF....Baylor,Bird
SG..Mike,Kobe
PG..Magic..Stockton
last 2...West,Kareem

My list doesnt claim these are the best 12 players ever.....its a list of who i think gives me the best chance at a championship.....guys like Malone,James,Curry,AI,ScottieBarkely ect ect all great players better than several on my list.My players all have 1 common quality......they made everyone else better.

https://media3.giphy.com/media/v1.Y2lkPTc5MGI3NjExZnowNDA2bGI2YjNubjd0aWIzcjN5ZXpsMHZ1NTg3enFoOW9kcGxtYyZlcD12MV9pbnRlcm5hbF9naWZfYnlfaWQmY3Q9Zw/YtvCIwqNJhUmA/giphy.gif

[williemayshayes]

Kobe belongs up there.

His Airness the GOAT said that Kobe is the only player who could beat him one-on-one.

So, he belongs.

Michael Beasley and the guy down at LA Fitness are probably 13 and 14

[the mesiah]

Im gong to aproch this from the same angle as i would who do you take to start a franchise with the goal being championships.ill take 2 guys from all 5 positions and the remaining 2 will be guys id like to take but didn't get into the top 2 at their position.

Center Russell,Wilt
PF.....Duncan,Elvin Hayes (yes he played both 4-5)
SF....Baylor,Bird
SG..Mike,Kobe
PG..Magic..Stockton
last 2...West,Kareem

My list doesnt claim these are the best 12 players ever.....its a list of who i think gives me the best chance at a championship.....guys like Malone,James,Curry,AI,ScottieBarkely ect ect all great players better than several on my list.My players all have 1 common quality......they made everyone else better.



I like to see some posters think outside the box and not just pick the usual players ..

[hermanotarjeta]

I like to see some posters think outside the box and not just pick the usual players ..

I think it’s a great list for the most part - true team players who try to improve the chances of their team success by harnessing their teammates strengths.

No major cancers on this list.

[jcardstore]

Ah yes, great list with Elgin Baylor and his 0 MVPs and 0 rings :cry:

so much outside of the box thinking!

[the mesiah]

Ah yes, great list with Elgin Baylor and his 0 MVPs and 0 rings :cry:

so much outside of the box thinking!

It’s lot better actual people posting about different players than seeing you constantly post in threads about dick riding Kobe’s lack of legacy and glazing over curry all the time ..

[Above the Rim]

Assume are not neccessarily going to pick Top 12, but rather construct the team to best win a Championship. Then you gotta put in at Forward Dennis Rodman - the ultimate role player. You will get plenty scoring elsewhere, but Rodman will get you the Chips.

[yiguiri2002]

Ah yes, great list with Elgin Baylor and his 0 MVPs and 0 rings :cry:

so much outside of the box thinking!

This is the basketball version of "enlightened centrism" in politics

[eastbayak]

Kobe belongs up there.

His Airness the GOAT said that Kobe is the only player who could beat him one-on-one.

So, he belongs.

John Rogers (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5B7U74Dg04k)

IYKYK

[williemayshayes]

Advanced Black Ink Leaders
(PER, WS, WS/48, BPM, or VORP)

1. Jordan 42
2. Kareem 39
3. James 32
4. Wilt 24
5. Jokic 23

Huge drop off after him.

If Box +/- and VORP were around for Kareem and Wilt's prime the estimated numbers would be

1. Kareem 45
2. Jordan 42
3. Wilt 40
4. James 32
5. Jokic 23

I have a really really hard time finding a reason to include anyone else in a top 5 list and knocking one of these guys out.

[jcardstore]

This is the basketball version of "enlightened centrism" in politics

I get that basketball top X debates are mostly subjective to a certain point but there are absolutely objectively wrong opinions.

[yiguiri2002]

I get that basketball top X debates are mostly subjective to a certain point but there are absolutely objectively wrong opinions.

There are more than a few LeBron haters here. I don't think a single one of them would put him below Elgin Baylor.

[jcardstore]

There are more than a few LeBron haters here. I don't think a single one of them would put him below Elgin Baylor.

We need hermano to confirm lol. If he ranks LeBron above Baylor then there's really nobody else on earth who might not

[hermanotarjeta]

We need hermano to confirm lol. If he ranks LeBron above Baylor then there's really nobody else on earth who might not

I read the list as being the best team players, not the best super team hoppers!:)!

[eastbayak]

I put them in alphabetical order to avoid the ranking arguments. What I'm interested in is whether there's any one else to deserves to be in the top 12?

Kareem Abdul Jabbar
Larry Bird
Kobe Bryant
Wilt Chamberlain
Stephen Curry
Tim Duncan
Lebron James
Magic Johnson
Michael Jordan
Hakeem Olajuwon
Shaquille O'Neal
Bill Russell

That sounds just right.

Confirmed.

[robert0629]

A case could be made for Dr. J. His dominance in the ABA is similar to how Jordan dominated the early 90s. I’m not sure why ABA stats are discounted. He also had one of the greatest NBA Finals performances ever in 1977 when the Sixers lost to the Trail Blazers, but was let down by several of his teammates.

Jerry West also has a case. For pretty much every year of his career, West’s scoring average went up in the playoffs. He led all playoff scorers four times. He was one of the most clutch players ever, and is still fifth all time in playoff ppg.

I’m not sure why there would be any doubt that Kobe Bryant belongs on this list. In fact an argument could be made that he’s a top five player. Kobe is one of the most double teamed players in NBA history, because he was one of the most feared players ever. He played in one of the most difficult eras to score in, and still put up incredible offensive numbers. He also has more championships that many of the players on this list. He has two Finals MVPs, and there are only like five or six players in NBA history with more than that. How can there be any doubt about a player who was once considered to be the best in the world?

[calmar]

A case could be made for Dr. J. His dominance in the ABA is similar to how Jordan dominated the early 90s. I’m not sure why ABA stats are discounted. He also had one of the greatest NBA Finals performances ever in 1977 when the Sixers lost to the Trail Blazers, but was let down by several of his teammates.

Jerry West also has a case. For pretty much every year of his career, West’s scoring average went up in the playoffs. He led all playoff scorers four times. He was one of the most clutch players ever, and is still fifth all time in playoff ppg.

I’m not sure why there would be any doubt that Kobe Bryant belongs on this list. In fact an argument could be made that he’s a top five player. Kobe is one of the most double teamed players in NBA history, because he was one of the most feared players ever. He played in one of the most difficult eras to score in, and still put up incredible offensive numbers. He also has more championships that many of the players on this list. He has two Finals MVPs, and there are only like five or six players in NBA history with more than that. How can there be any doubt about a player who was once considered to be the best in the world?

I've always been a huge Dr. J fan, and I do agree he gets strangely underrated at times, but I don't think he cracks the top 12. West was great also, of course, and had a sneaky great peak that people don't give him enough credit for -- advanced stats show he was the best player in the NBA in the 69-70 season, for example.

Kobe, alas, just has very little actual data to back up his reputation, beyond inefficent volume scoring numbers. PER, Box +/-, and WS/48 are all stats that confirm how good everyone else we're talking about as top-12 were. But Kobe ranks way down on those lists, more on par with players like Wade, McGrady, Lillard, Kyrie, Ginobli, Drexler, etc. Yes, Kobe won more, and that matters a lot. But also, the performance is the performance, and the numbers are the numbers.

[yiguiri2002]

Not to be a dick but you can't have more than 2 players from the 60s in this list. Wilt was so dominant he needs to be included and Bill Russell won too much to take him out.

That's it. The talent level in the league was significantly inferior. Kareem gets a pass because he was a really good player well into the mid-late 80s - had he retire 5 years early or so, I don't think he cracks the Top 12.

[sethc1020]

Looks right to me, Joker doesn't belong there yet.

[yiguiri2002]

The better question is who has the best chance to crack the list.

I would go KD/Joker and Giannis a distant third. Everyone else is out of range.

[calmar]

Not to be a dick but you can't have more than 2 players from the 60s in this list. Wilt was so dominant he needs to be included and Bill Russell won too much to take him out.

That's it. The talent level in the league was significantly inferior. Kareem gets a pass because he was a really good player well into the mid-late 80s - had he retire 5 years early or so, I don't think he cracks the Top 12.

Kareem only played for two months of the 1960s, at the beginning of the 1969-70 season. And according to the ridiculous and consistent amount of black ink in the "Advanced" section of his Basketball Reference page, plus his monster stats in the playoffs and two titles with two different teams, he was arguably the best player in the NBA for 11 straight seasons from 1970 to 1981. Kareem is not even close to being off this list.

[robert0629]

I've always been a huge Dr. J fan, and I do agree he gets strangely underrated at times, but I don't think he cracks the top 12. West was great also, of course, and had a sneaky great peak that people don't give him enough credit for -- advanced stats show he was the best player in the NBA in the 69-70 season, for example.

Kobe, alas, just has very little actual data to back up his reputation, beyond inefficent volume scoring numbers. PER, Box +/-, and WS/48 are all stats that confirm how good everyone else we're talking about as top-12 were. But Kobe ranks way down on those lists, more on par with players like Wade, McGrady, Lillard, Kyrie, Ginobli, Drexler, etc. Yes, Kobe won more, and that matters a lot. But also, the performance is the performance, and the numbers are the numbers.

Win Shares come from wins. You're not going to have a high number of WS when your team doesn't win. Kobe played several seasons with a roster that would have been lucky to win 10 games without him. He was literally winning games by himself. Kobe also played in the triangle offense. Notice how Phil Jackson never really had a true playmaker in all his championships. The offense is designed to keep the ball moving. It was obviously very successful, but it limits the touches that any one player is going to get. This limits the stats that Kobe might have gotten had he played in an offense that was catered to his abilities. This may hurt his advanced stats, but the eye test tells us how good he really was, and you can't argue with the results.

As for efficiency, Kobe was one of the most efficient shooting guards from his era. He played in one of the most difficult eras to score in, especially for shooting guards. Lets not compare Kobe's efficiency numbers to other positions, or to other guards like Jordan who played in a different era. Plus nobody's Jordan. Kobe's career shooting percentage is (.447). Ray Allen, who's considered one of the greatest shooters of all time has a career shooting percentage of (.452), which is a little bit better than Kobe. There were also eight season where Kobe had a better shooting percentage than Allen in that same season. Also, Allen was getting a high percentage of open looks by running through screens, whereas Kobe was often hitting difficult mid-range shots with a defender in his face.

I don't necessarily think it's a criteria for making a top 10 or 12 list, but a player who was considered the best player in the world for a stretch of years in my opinion should get the nod over someone who was not. I won't go too far back, because I started watching basketball in the late 70s and early 80s. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong about some of these players. But Wilt and Russell were the top two in the 60s. In the 70s, it was Kareem and Dr. J. In the 80s, Bird and Magic. Jordan in the 90s. I don't think there was really a number two in the 90s. You would here Barkley and Malone mentioned at times, but Jordan was just so damn good nobody else really got noticed. In the late 90s to 2000s, it was Shaq for a few years. Then Kobe and LeBron from 2000 to 2010. Then LeBron by himself for awhile. You would here Durant occasionally mentioned as a number two, but only for a few years. Then Giannis for a few years. And now it's Joker and SGA.

I'm not saying that players like Hakeem, Duncan, or Curry don't belong on this list. They are all great players who deserve top 10 or 12 consideration. But I don't ever remember any of these players being thought of as the best one or two players in the world when they were playing. In my opinion, Kobe absolutely deserves to be above these three players. I would also put him ahead of Wilt and Dr. J. I would rank him pretty evenly with Magic and Bird.

Grant Hill believes that Kobe is the GOAT. He said that Kobe was the toughest player he ever had to guard and that he had no weakness. Hill also played against Jordan and LeBron. “Kobe is relentless,” Hill said. “Every time down the court, he’s trying to score, and he was the one guy that I felt really didn’t have a weakness. He could go right, go left over either shoulder in the post, could hit crazy shots you know contested from 3-pointer. You just had to have amnesia sometimes. You just had to get over the fact he was going to hit tough shots.”

[williemayshayes]

Kobe played in seven NBA Finals and played every second of his career for the second most successful franchise in the history of the league.

The "well he played for bad teams" narrative just falls flat for me.

[jcardstore]

I'm not saying that players like Hakeem, Duncan, or Curry don't belong on this list. They are all great players who deserve top 10 or 12 consideration. But I don't ever remember any of these players being thought of as the best one or two players in the world when they were playing.

You typed out a whole novel just to make this insane statement.

Curry was a unanimous MVP... Hakeem was b2b DPOY and MVP for a year and top 5 in MVP voting 4 years in a row with 2 titles and 2 FMVP.

Was Tim Duncan never considered the best player in the league? Idk maybe not but he was top 5 in MVP voting 8 YEARS IN A ROW and top 5 in DPOY for 5 of those years

Kobe fans will jump through hoops to defend the guy but to come and say these 3 players were never considered best in the league to defend Kobe is just wild.

[the mesiah]

I'm not saying that players like HAKEEM, Duncan, or Curry don't belong on this list. They are all great players who deserve top 10 or 12 consideration. But I don't ever remember any of these players being thought of as the best one or two players in the world when they were playing. In my opinion, Kobe absolutely deserves to be above these three players. I would also put him ahead of Wilt and Dr. J. I would rank him pretty evenly with Magic and Bird.




https://media1.tenor.com/m/kSm5rdC--T4AAAAC/wtf-christian-bale.gif

[h00perstar34]

Question is will Wemby, Flagg, Shai or Luka end up on this list

[the mesiah]

Question is will Wemby, Flagg, Shai or Luka end up on this list

I think out of all those guys Coop would be the one to get to that top 10-15 when it’s done ..then next best chance would be Luka but he gets hurt too much lately and think he will break down ..then Wemby because I think he will break down later on as well ..then shai

[rnocards]

John Rogers (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5B7U74Dg04k)

IYKYK

haha... lucky

[rnocards]

Michael Beasley and the guy down at LA Fitness are probably 13 and 14

And Rogers apparently #15... :D

[fabiani12333]

Win Shares come from wins. You're not going to have a high number of WS when your team doesn't win. Kobe played several seasons with a roster that would have been lucky to win 10 games without him. He was literally winning games by himself. Kobe also played in the triangle offense. Notice how Phil Jackson never really had a true playmaker in all his championships. The offense is designed to keep the ball moving. It was obviously very successful, but it limits the touches that any one player is going to get. This limits the stats that Kobe might have gotten had he played in an offense that was catered to his abilities. This may hurt his advanced stats, but the eye test tells us how good he really was, and you can't argue with the results.

As for efficiency, Kobe was one of the most efficient shooting guards from his era. He played in one of the most difficult eras to score in, especially for shooting guards. Lets not compare Kobe's efficiency numbers to other positions, or to other guards like Jordan who played in a different era. Plus nobody's Jordan. Kobe's career shooting percentage is (.447). Ray Allen, who's considered one of the greatest shooters of all time has a career shooting percentage of (.452), which is a little bit better than Kobe. There were also eight season where Kobe had a better shooting percentage than Allen in that same season. Also, Allen was getting a high percentage of open looks by running through screens, whereas Kobe was often hitting difficult mid-range shots with a defender in his face.

I don't necessarily think it's a criteria for making a top 10 or 12 list, but a player who was considered the best player in the world for a stretch of years in my opinion should get the nod over someone who was not. I won't go too far back, because I started watching basketball in the late 70s and early 80s. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong about some of these players. But Wilt and Russell were the top two in the 60s. In the 70s, it was Kareem and Dr. J. In the 80s, Bird and Magic. Jordan in the 90s. I don't think there was really a number two in the 90s. You would here Barkley and Malone mentioned at times, but Jordan was just so damn good nobody else really got noticed. In the late 90s to 2000s, it was Shaq for a few years. Then Kobe and LeBron from 2000 to 2010. Then LeBron by himself for awhile. You would here Durant occasionally mentioned as a number two, but only for a few years. Then Giannis for a few years. And now it's Joker and SGA.

I'm not saying that players like Hakeem, Duncan, or Curry don't belong on this list. They are all great players who deserve top 10 or 12 consideration. But I don't ever remember any of these players being thought of as the best one or two players in the world when they were playing. In my opinion, Kobe absolutely deserves to be above these three players. I would also put him ahead of Wilt and Dr. J. I would rank him pretty evenly with Magic and Bird.

Grant Hill believes that Kobe is the GOAT. He said that Kobe was the toughest player he ever had to guard and that he had no weakness. Hill also played against Jordan and LeBron. “Kobe is relentless,” Hill said. “Every time down the court, he’s trying to score, and he was the one guy that I felt really didn’t have a weakness. He could go right, go left over either shoulder in the post, could hit crazy shots you know contested from 3-pointer. You just had to have amnesia sometimes. You just had to get over the fact he was going to hit tough shots.”

The problem is Kobe took too many tough shots -- he forced shots.

I don't remember Kobe ever being considered the best in the game at any time during his career -- it was MJ, then Shaq, then Lebron.

Ray Allen shot better and more often from three, which is why his overall FG% is comparable to Kobe's. But his and Kobe's eFG% are not comparable -- Allen's was much better at .530 versus Kobe's .482.

[Asian62150]

The problem is Kobe took too many tough shots -- he forced shots.

I don't remember Kobe ever being considered the best in the game at any time during his career -- it was MJ, then Shaq, then Lebron.

Ray Allen shot better and more often from three, which is why his overall FG% is comparable to Kobe's. But his and Kobe's eFG% are not comparable -- Allen's was much better at .530 versus Kobe's .482.

Kobe also doesn't get enough credit for taking terrible and dumb shots at the end of games. He was one of the first (maybe the first) to popularize winding down the game clock to take the last shot of the game, even if your team was losing.

It's just dumb basketball.

[yiguiri2002]

Kareem only played for two months of the 1960s, at the beginning of the 1969-70 season. And according to the ridiculous and consistent amount of black ink in the "Advanced" section of his Basketball Reference page, plus his monster stats in the playoffs and two titles with two different teams, he was arguably the best player in the NBA for 11 straight seasons from 1970 to 1981. Kareem is not even close to being off this list.

I don't think it was arguable that Kareem was the best player in that era.

But that era, just like the one before that, was really weak compared to anything post 80s.

[Asian62150]

I don't think it was arguable that Kareem was the best player in that era.

But that era, just like the one before that, was really weak compared to anything post 80s.

I get what you're saying, but you can apply that to any era.

60s players should be better than 50s. 70s better than 60s, 80s better than 70s, etc... Maybe you can make an exception for the 70s since drugs were an unfortunate part of the basketball landscape at that time.

Bill Russell won 11 rings in 13 years. Is it his fault there weren't 32 teams in the 60s? Or that basketball wasn't as widespread so there weren't as many talented athletes in the Association? Are we just supposed to diminish his achievements? How many rings should we dock him? 5? 8?

I think a good way to measure guys is against their contemporaries. How much better was Russell compared to Chamberlain/West/Cousy/Pettit?

How much better was MJ compared to the other Dream Team members (and Hakeem)?

Comparing eras is fun but it's also lazy because every era should be better than the one that came before it. With improved science/nutrition/knowledge/training/technology, the skill level and understand of players should always be increasing.

How much better would someone like Wilt Chamberlain have been if they had today's weight lifting programs? If they got to fly on charter flights instead of cramped commercial airlines (or trains?). If they weren't facing racism on a daily basis? If they didn't have to play back to back to back games?

We can say MJ is the greatest, but if you transported 27 year old MJ to today's game would he still be the GOAT? Or would he be viewed as "just" an MVP-lvel player similar to SGA?

[calmar]

Win Shares come from wins. You're not going to have a high number of WS when your team doesn't win. Kobe played several seasons with a roster that would have been lucky to win 10 games without him. He was literally winning games by himself. Kobe also played in the triangle offense. Notice how Phil Jackson never really had a true playmaker in all his championships. The offense is designed to keep the ball moving. It was obviously very successful, but it limits the touches that any one player is going to get. This limits the stats that Kobe might have gotten had he played in an offense that was catered to his abilities. This may hurt his advanced stats, but the eye test tells us how good he really was, and you can't argue with the results.

As for efficiency, Kobe was one of the most efficient shooting guards from his era. He played in one of the most difficult eras to score in, especially for shooting guards. Lets not compare Kobe's efficiency numbers to other positions, or to other guards like Jordan who played in a different era. Plus nobody's Jordan. Kobe's career shooting percentage is (.447). Ray Allen, who's considered one of the greatest shooters of all time has a career shooting percentage of (.452), which is a little bit better than Kobe. There were also eight season where Kobe had a better shooting percentage than Allen in that same season. Also, Allen was getting a high percentage of open looks by running through screens, whereas Kobe was often hitting difficult mid-range shots with a defender in his face.

I don't necessarily think it's a criteria for making a top 10 or 12 list, but a player who was considered the best player in the world for a stretch of years in my opinion should get the nod over someone who was not. I won't go too far back, because I started watching basketball in the late 70s and early 80s. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong about some of these players. But Wilt and Russell were the top two in the 60s. In the 70s, it was Kareem and Dr. J. In the 80s, Bird and Magic. Jordan in the 90s. I don't think there was really a number two in the 90s. You would here Barkley and Malone mentioned at times, but Jordan was just so damn good nobody else really got noticed. In the late 90s to 2000s, it was Shaq for a few years. Then Kobe and LeBron from 2000 to 2010. Then LeBron by himself for awhile. You would here Durant occasionally mentioned as a number two, but only for a few years. Then Giannis for a few years. And now it's Joker and SGA.

I'm not saying that players like Hakeem, Duncan, or Curry don't belong on this list. They are all great players who deserve top 10 or 12 consideration. But I don't ever remember any of these players being thought of as the best one or two players in the world when they were playing. In my opinion, Kobe absolutely deserves to be above these three players. I would also put him ahead of Wilt and Dr. J. I would rank him pretty evenly with Magic and Bird.

Grant Hill believes that Kobe is the GOAT. He said that Kobe was the toughest player he ever had to guard and that he had no weakness. Hill also played against Jordan and LeBron. “Kobe is relentless,” Hill said. “Every time down the court, he’s trying to score, and he was the one guy that I felt really didn’t have a weakness. He could go right, go left over either shoulder in the post, could hit crazy shots you know contested from 3-pointer. You just had to have amnesia sometimes. You just had to get over the fact he was going to hit tough shots.”
Actual stats just don't show these things. The idea that "Kobe had to win games by himself" would show up in Win Shares Per 48 Minutes, and in Box +/-, but he ranks way, way down the list in those categories, both for the regular season and the playoffs. All the other all-time greats we're talking about rank well above him in tell-tale stats like those.

[cms11]

The problem is Kobe took too many tough shots -- he forced shots.

I don't remember Kobe ever being considered the best in the game at any time during his career -- it was MJ, then Shaq, then Lebron.

Ray Allen shot better and more often from three, which is why his overall FG% is comparable to Kobe's. But his and Kobe's eFG% are not comparable -- Allen's was much better at .530 versus Kobe's .482.

I'd argue that he was consider the best in the game in the 3 years where he won the MVP and then two Finals MVPs.

I think it was those two titles that finally made LeBron go to Miami to prove he was the best.

[calmar]

I'd argue that he was consider the best in the game in the 3 years where he won the MVP and then two Finals MVPs.

I think it was those two titles that finally made LeBron go to Miami to prove he was the best.
That was a five year stretch, from '06 to '10, and during that period LeBron was better. Every year. The whole time. VORP, PER, WS, WS/48, Box +/-, take your pick, all the advanced stats show that. LeBron also had better playoff stats during these years, but didn't have a teammate nearly as good as Gasol or a coach nearly as good as Phil.

[yiguiri2002]

That was a five year stretch, from '06 to '10, and during that period LeBron was better. Every year. The whole time. VORP, PER, WS, WS/48, Box +/-, take your pick, all the advanced stats show that. LeBron also had better playoff stats during these years, but didn't have a teammate nearly as good as Gasol or a coach nearly as good as Phil.

Absolutely. Late 2000s LeBron was better than Kobe. Kobe had a better roster and won titles.

[CommomSensei88]

Kareem only played for two months of the 1960s, at the beginning of the 1969-70 season. And according to the ridiculous and consistent amount of black ink in the "Advanced" section of his Basketball Reference page, plus his monster stats in the playoffs and two titles with two different teams, he was arguably the best player in the NBA for 11 straight seasons from 1970 to 1981. Kareem is not even close to being off this list.

Kareem had probably the most help in the Goat list other than LeBron.

Take a look at the amount of Hall of Fame teammates he played with during his career.

Kareem played with a stacked lakers team too.

[hermanotarjeta]

That was a five year stretch, from '06 to '10, and during that period LeBron was better. Every year. The whole time. VORP, PER, WS, WS/48, Box +/-, take your pick, all the advanced stats show that. LeBron also had better playoff stats during these years, but didn't have a teammate nearly as good as Gasol or a coach nearly as good as Phil.

Absolutely. Late 2000s LeBron was better than Kobe. Kobe had a better roster and won titles.

Gee, despite his greatness, why couldn’t LeBron win anything until he joined a superteam? Was it because he was playing with barely wnba-bench teammates or was it the ultra competitive east? :coffee::coffee::coffee:

[calmar]

Kareem had probably the most help in the Goat list other than LeBron.

Take a look at the amount of Hall of Fame teammates he played with during his career.

Kareem played with a stacked lakers team too.

No, that would be Russell, and it's not close. Best coach (Auerbach then him) and organization, and 12 HOF teammates who he played with for many years, not just here and there when their paths crossed. And some of them, like Sharman, Cousy, Sam Jones, and Havlicek, were not just coasting off the team and Russell's greatness, but were great themselves as well.

All that said, Russell is the greatest winner in the history of organized sports, and therefore should always be at or very near the top of the GOAT conversation. My favorite way of looking at Russell's greatness and winning ways is this: In the 15 years between 1955 and 1969, Russell's teams could have won 16 championships: 2 NCAA Championships, 1 Olympic Gold, and 13 NBA Championships. They won 14 of those 16, only missing out in the 1958 and 1967 NBA seasons. That is bonkers.

[Asian62150]

No, that would be Russell, and it's not close. Best coach (Auerbach then him) and organization, and 12 HOF teammates who he played with for many years, not just here and there when their paths crossed. And some of them, like Sharman, Cousy, Sam Jones, and Havlicek, were not just coasting off the team and Russell's greatness, but were great themselves as well.

All that said, Russell is the greatest winner in the history of organized sports, and therefore should always be at or very near the top of the GOAT conversation. My favorite way of looking at Russell's greatness and winning ways is this: In the 15 years between 1955 and 1969, Russell's teams could have won 16 championships: 2 NCAA Championships, 1 Olympic Gold, and 13 NBA Championships. They won 14 of those 16, only missing out in the 1958 and 1967 NBA seasons. That is bonkers.

It's just a plain fact that Russell is the greatest winner in the history of professional team sports.

And yes, Russell had great and amazing teammates. But Russell also did his part to make them great. The 60s Celtics revolutionized the fast break, and that was mainly due to Russell either getting the rebounding and sending an outlet pass to Cousy, or Russell intentionally blocking a shot to his teammate to start the fast break. Today's players prefer to volleyball spike the ball into the stands to get on highlight reels instead of tapping it to a teammate. Smh.

Another way of looking at Russell's greatness is that the year Wilt averaged 50/26 and Oscar averaged a 31/12/11, Russell won the MVP in a landslide.

[discodanman45]

Two players with 3 MVP's should be mentioned more here. Moses Malone and Jokic. I don't think one person mentioned Moses here, which is sad.

[Above the Rim]

What if Russell was on Philly, and Wilt was on Boston all those years ?

[the mesiah]

Two players with 3 MVP's should be mentioned more here. Moses Malone and Jokic. I don't think one person mentioned Moses here, which is sad.

99.9% of people on here don’t know who Moses is plus he doesn’t have any prizm 10’s out there to fit their narrative .. FO FO FO !

[Asian62150]

What if Russell was on Philly, and Wilt was on Boston all those years ?

Red would have traded Wilt for Russell because he just cared about winning and Philly would have happily accepted that trade because at that time, they cared more about surviving financially and Wilt was a local legend so he would have driven ticket sales.

If Russell was stuck on Philly and Wilt was stuck on Boston, Russell would have more than 2 rings and Wilt would have less than 11.

[blackvodka]

Two players with 3 MVP's should be mentioned more here. Moses Malone and Jokic. I don't think one person mentioned Moses here, which is sad.Moses has become my pick for most underrated player. The center position is deep and because of that he gets forgotten more often than not.

I believe I was the only one who even mentioned him and that was in the next tier of greats.

Sent from my motorola razr 2024 using Tapatalk

[CommomSensei88]

Two players with 3 MVP's should be mentioned more here. Moses Malone and Jokic. I don't think one person mentioned Moses here, which is sad.

Moses Malone took a 40-win Houston Rockets team to the 1981 Finals.

Lost to the Celtics in 6 games though.

Moses even beat the defending champ Lakers and out played Kareem in the first round.

You never hear about that either.

[cms11]

Two players with 3 MVP's should be mentioned more here. Moses Malone and Jokic. I don't think one person mentioned Moses here, which is sad.

Funny part about Moses is that he seems like an "old" player, but he's only a year older than Bird. Maybe it's the name because I was a kid in the 80s and thought he was much older than he was.

I do think if Jokic's career ended today he'd be on par with Moses in the all-time rankings. People are just predicting him to have more MVPs and titles before he's done.

[cms11]

No, that would be Russell, and it's not close. Best coach (Auerbach then him) and organization, and 12 HOF teammates who he played with for many years, not just here and there when their paths crossed. And some of them, like Sharman, Cousy, Sam Jones, and Havlicek, were not just coasting off the team and Russell's greatness, but were great themselves as well.

All that said, Russell is the greatest winner in the history of organized sports, and therefore should always be at or very near the top of the GOAT conversation. My favorite way of looking at Russell's greatness and winning ways is this: In the 15 years between 1955 and 1969, Russell's teams could have won 16 championships: 2 NCAA Championships, 1 Olympic Gold, and 13 NBA Championships. They won 14 of those 16, only missing out in the 1958 and 1967 NBA seasons. That is bonkers.

Agree completely. That's why people discount the 11 titles. Otherwise he'd be the undisputed GOAT.

[cms11]

Gee, despite his greatness, why couldn’t LeBron win anything until he joined a superteam? Was it because he was playing with barely wnba-bench teammates or was it the ultra competitive east? :coffee::coffee::coffee:

Interesting how LeBron playing with Wade and Bosh is a "superteam", but Steph playing with Klay and Draymond isn't.

[eastbayak]

Interesting how LeBron playing with Wade and Bosh is a "superteam", but Steph playing with Klay and Draymond isn't.

And we can't forget MJ playing with Pippen, Rodman and a prime Kukoc (especially during an era of weak competition).

A super superteam amongst a league of weak teams.

[yiguiri2002]

Agree completely. That's why people discount the 11 titles. Otherwise he'd be the undisputed GOAT.

I discount them because there were like 8 teams in the NBA and half the players had other jobs.

I'm exaggerating, but any benchwarmer from nowadays would be an All-Star in those days.

[Above the Rim]

Just about all knowledgeable NBA fans/experts would rank Wilt quite a bit higher than Russell in the GOAT debate. To say that if Wilt was on those Celtics teams instead of Russell - and Wilt would not have fared as well - well, ok, I guess you're entitled to your opinion.

[Asian62150]

I discount them because there were like 8 teams in the NBA and half the players had other jobs.

I'm exaggerating, but any benchwarmer from nowadays would be an All-Star in those days.

I agree but isn't that just the evolution of sport?

We still consider Babe Ruth one of the greatest. He also had amazing teammates and only faced white players in MLB back then. And there were less teams. Why don't we revere Bill Russell in the same way?

[cms11]

Just about all knowledgeable NBA fans/experts would rank Wilt quite a bit higher than Russell in the GOAT debate. To say that if Wilt was on those Celtics teams instead of Russell - and Wilt would not have fared as well - well, ok, I guess you're entitled to your opinion.

On pure ability on the basketball court, not many knowledgeable fans would deny Wilt was a better player. But personality is part of the game and Wilt had problems everywhere he played.

[the mesiah]

Interesting how LeBron playing with Wade and Bosh is a "superteam", but Steph playing with Klay and Draymond isn't.

Can’t stand when I see casuals who know 0 about basketball call Steph /klay /dray a “super team” ..they were drafted into the team and built that into a championship contender ..and no I’m NOT including Kevin Durant joining the team cherry picking chips that’s a whole different issue .

[yiguiri2002]

I agree but isn't that just the evolution of sport?

We still consider Babe Ruth one of the greatest. He also had amazing teammates and only faced white players in MLB back then. And there were less teams. Why don't we revere Bill Russell in the same way?

1. I think we do. That's why he's in any Top 10 list.
2. He never scored more than 20 PPG, shot in the low 40s from 2 and was very Shaq like from the free throw line.

[cms11]

Can’t stand when I see casuals who know 0 about basketball call Steph /klay /dray a “super team” ..they were drafted into the team and built that into a championship contender ..and no I’m NOT including Kevin Durant joining the team cherry picking chips that’s a whole different issue .

So "superteam" is only when someone changes teams, not when their GM drafts All-Star players to make the team "super". Got it.

In other words, players unlucky enough to be drafted by teams with a poor GM and/or cheap owner should just suffer their entire career and never will title.

[Asian62150]

1. I think we do. That's why he's in any Top 10 list.
2. He never scored more than 20 PPG, shot in the low 40s from 2 and was very Shaq like from the free throw line.

Yeah but you rarely hear anyone talk down Babe Ruth or bring up any of the same detractions (teammates, less teams, less competition) as you do when bringing up Bill Russell.

And yeah, Russell didn't put up gaudy stats, but that's because he didn't need to. Like I said, he won MVP in a landslide the same year Wilt average 50/25 and Oscar averaged a triple double. How great would someone have to be today to best Jokic in a landslide vote?

Considering the amount of weight we put on today's NBA players to get rings, it's surprising that Russell isn't treated with a mythical reverence the way The Babe is. And it's not like Russell was Bob Horry on those Celtic teams. He was the heart and soul and driving force.

[the mesiah]

So "superteam" is only when someone changes teams, not when their GM drafts All-Star players to make the team "super". Got it.

In other words, players unlucky enough to be drafted by teams with a poor GM and/or cheap owner should just suffer their entire career and never will title.

Draymond was a 2nd round pick nothing super about that , klay wasn’t even a all American in college but I guess he was already a NBA All Star player when he got drafted..GOT IT

[jcardstore]

Can’t stand when I see casuals who know 0 about basketball call Steph /klay /dray a “super team” ..they were drafted into the team and built that into a championship contender ..and no I’m NOT including Kevin Durant joining the team cherry picking chips that’s a whole different issue .

because they were drafted doesn't mean it was a super team? What a stupid take

[the mesiah]

because they were drafted doesn't mean it was a super team? What a stupid take

So basically from your dumb /ignorant ass takes ..the Duncan spurs were a “super team” , the OKC Thunder are a “super team” ..damn FOH u dumb ass!

[jcardstore]

So basically from your dumb /ignorant ass takes ..the Duncan spurs were a “super team” , the OKC Thunder are a “super team” ..damn FOH u dumb ass!

struck a nerve there :cry:

do you need a hug?

also yes those are absolutely super teams and everyone (except you I guess) agrees.

[rhigh2390]

Just because a team is really good doesn't make them a super team. Klay and Draymond were amazing in their role. They couldn't have been on any other team and had the same impact or been as great. This is a hypothetical, but I don't think a team with Klay or Dray in their prime as the #1 even makes the playoffs.

Not sure how people don't see a difference between drafting a team that ends up being great vs taking all stars from 3 different teams and putting them on the same team.

[the mesiah]

struck a nerve there :cry:

do you need a hug?

also yes those are absolutely super teams and everyone (except you I guess) agrees.

Nah u definitely didn’t strike a nerve ,.you just keep getting dumber and dumber by the day when u post ..saying the Duncan spurs were a “super team” ..no real knowledgeable would even think the Duncan spurs were a “super team” ..(except you and cms I guess)

[the mesiah]

Just because a team is really good doesn't make them a super team. Klay and Draymond were amazing in their role. They couldn't have been on any other team and had the same impact or been as great. This is a hypothetical, but I don't think a team with Klay or Dray in their prime as the #1 even makes the playoffs.

Not sure how people don't see a difference between drafting a team that ends up being great vs taking all stars from 3 different teams and putting them on the same team.
There we go , some one that actually gets it unlike jcard and cms ..

[cms11]

Just because a team is really good doesn't make them a super team. Klay and Draymond were amazing in their role. They couldn't have been on any other team and had the same impact or been as great. This is a hypothetical, but I don't think a team with Klay or Dray in their prime as the #1 even makes the playoffs.

Not sure how people don't see a difference between drafting a team that ends up being great vs taking all stars from 3 different teams and putting them on the same team.

Comparison of LeBron's Heat and Steph's Warriors during their 1st title:

Wade - 10th in MVP voting.
Bosh - All-Star

Klay - 10th in MVP voting.
Draymond - 2nd in DPOY
Bogust - 6th in DPOY
Iguodala - 4th in 6MOY
Speights - 7th in 6MOY

[rhigh2390]

Comparison of LeBron's Heat and Steph's Warriors during their 1st title:

Wade - 10th in MVP voting.
Bosh - All-Star

Klay - 10th in MVP voting.
Draymond - 2nd in DPOY
Bogust - 6th in DPOY
Iguodala - 4th in 6MOY
Speights - 7th in 6MOY

https://media.tenor.com/6aVKGZZ6N7cAAAAM/honestly-i-dont-know-where-to-start.gif

Crazy that there are people this dense when it comes to basketball, but I guess it is a public forum.

[jcardstore]

I think I understand. It’s only a super team if LeBron joins it. High praise I guess lol

[eastbayak]

Comparison of LeBron's Heat and Steph's Warriors during their 1st title:

Wade - 10th in MVP voting.
Bosh - All-Star

Klay - 10th in MVP voting.
Draymond - 2nd in DPOY
Bogust - 6th in DPOY
Iguodala - 4th in 6MOY
Speights - 7th in 6MOY

LOL!! Sorry, I've never seen Speights on any list. Mo Buckets!!

[yiguiri2002]

Yeah but you rarely hear anyone talk down Babe Ruth or bring up any of the same detractions (teammates, less teams, less competition) as you do when bringing up Bill Russell.

And yeah, Russell didn't put up gaudy stats, but that's because he didn't need to. Like I said, he won MVP in a landslide the same year Wilt average 50/25 and Oscar averaged a triple double. How great would someone have to be today to best Jokic in a landslide vote?

Considering the amount of weight we put on today's NBA players to get rings, it's surprising that Russell isn't treated with a mythical reverence the way The Babe is. And it's not like Russell was Bob Horry on those Celtic teams. He was the heart and soul and driving force.

Wilt's numbers are not talked down as much as Bill Russell's IMO. And that's because he had incredible, out of this world numbers.

Russell or the Celtics never needed the numbers? They went to a few Game 7s. They never swept. They would have absolutely taken a few Wilt-like games to secure their rings faster.

[yiguiri2002]

Warriors and Heat were both super teams. Heat was more of a super team. That's it.

[fabiani12333]

Interesting how LeBron playing with Wade and Bosh is a "superteam", but Steph playing with Klay and Draymond isn't.

Because Klay and Draymond were more complementary pieces than Wade and Bosh. Wade had already won a championship and was an 8x All-NBA selection (2x 1st team), while Klay was only a 2x All-NBA selection (2x 3rd team). Wade was a primary ball handler at guard, while Klay was a catch-and-shoot three-point specialist who played good perimeter defense. Draymond was a great defender and enforcer type, who would direct the defense and bring the ball up the court on offense. Wade, Bosh and Lebron had to sacrifice shots and share the ball, while Curry, Klay and Draymond were more unique from each other and a more natural fit.

[Asian62150]

Wilt's numbers are not talked down as much as Bill Russell's IMO. And that's because he had incredible, out of this world numbers.

Russell or the Celtics never needed the numbers? They went to a few Game 7s. They never swept. They would have absolutely taken a few Wilt-like games to secure their rings faster.

By not needing the numbers, I meant Russell didn't have to put up better numbers than Wilt to be considered more valuable than Wilt. Nor did Russell care about being "better" than Wilt. He only cared about winning (on the court).

Off the court, he cared about being the respect that came being being the highest paid player. When Wilt got paid $100K, Russell asked for $100,001 and got it from Red.

[pingbling23]

I think I understand. It’s only a super team if LeBron joins it. High praise I guess lol

My favorite is the claim that the cavs 2nd stint and lakers (look at that roster) were super teams. Now klay and draymond were just role players. Klay scored 37 in a quarter and 60 in 29 minutes in separate games for Pete sake. Draymond allegedly the leader in the locker room and one of the most decorated defensive players in history. Just some role players :D

[fabiani12333]

Yeah but you rarely hear anyone talk down Babe Ruth or bring up any of the same detractions (teammates, less teams, less competition) as you do when bringing up Bill Russell.

And yeah, Russell didn't put up gaudy stats, but that's because he didn't need to. Like I said, he won MVP in a landslide the same year Wilt average 50/25 and Oscar averaged a triple double. How great would someone have to be today to best Jokic in a landslide vote?

Considering the amount of weight we put on today's NBA players to get rings, it's surprising that Russell isn't treated with a mythical reverence the way The Babe is. And it's not like Russell was Bob Horry on those Celtic teams. He was the heart and soul and driving force.

Russell was the Joe DiMaggio of the NBA -- DiMaggio won 9 titles with the Yankees and 3 MVPs, including over Ted Williams in the season he hit over .400 (basically the equivalent of Wilt averaging nearly 50 a game).

[fabiani12333]

My favorite is the claim that the cavs 2nd stint and lakers (look at that roster) were super teams. Now klay and draymond were just role players. Klay scored 37 in a quarter and 60 in 29 minutes in separate games for Pete sake. Draymond allegedly the leader in the locker room and one of the most decorated defensive players in history. Just some role players :D

Klay was streaky. He had the ability to light it up from three and win a game. But he was never a primary scorer, unlike Wade. Wade led the league in points-per-game with 30.2 -- Klay was a consistent 20+ point scorer, but never versatile enough on-ball to average high 20s or even 30s like Wade.

Draymond was a leader, but also volatile. He brought the energy and intensity, but he was a double-edged sword -- he could hurt the team, too, like in the '16 Finals.

[pingbling23]

Klay was streaky. He had the ability to light it up from three and win a game. But he was never a primary scorer, unlike Wade. Wade led the league in points-per-game with 30.2 -- Klay was a consistent 20+ point scorer, but never versatile enough on-ball to average high 20s or even 30s like Wade.

Draymond was a leader, but also volatile. He brought the energy and intensity, but he was a double-edged sword -- he could hurt the team, too, like in the '16 Finals.

I think it’s fair to say klay sacrificed his scoring for Steph. Klay could have easily averaged 25-30. Wade was obviously the best player LeBron played with but he also went downhill with his knees. He wasn’t the same player as earlier in his career. Still very good especially early in their heat run.

[Asian62150]

Klay was streaky. He had the ability to light it up from three and win a game. But he was never a primary scorer, unlike Wade. Wade led the league in points-per-game with 30.2 -- Klay was a consistent 20+ point scorer, but never versatile enough on-ball to average high 20s or even 30s like Wade.

Draymond was a leader, but also volatile. He brought the energy and intensity, but he was a double-edged sword -- he could hurt the team, too, like in the '16 Finals.

I think it’s fair to say klay sacrificed his scoring for Steph. Klay could have easily averaged 25-30. Wade was obviously the best player LeBron played with but he also went downhill with his knees. He wasn’t the same player as earlier in his career. Still very good especially early in their heat run.

If we're comparing head to head, Wade is better than Klay. But Klay was the perfect compliment to Steph. Having two guys who were lethal from 3 really opened things up for their offense. Wade or Steph wouldn't have been nearly as effective together as the Splash Bros were.

[rhigh2390]

I'll just note again that we have guys on a basketball forum comparing Dwyane Wade to Klay Thompson... Can always depend on Blowout for some great takes.

[CommomSensei88]

No, that would be Russell, and it's not close. Best coach (Auerbach then him) and organization, and 12 HOF teammates who he played with for many years, not just here and there when their paths crossed. And some of them, like Sharman, Cousy, Sam Jones, and Havlicek, were not just coasting off the team and Russell's greatness, but were great themselves as well.

All that said, Russell is the greatest winner in the history of organized sports, and therefore should always be at or very near the top of the GOAT conversation. My favorite way of looking at Russell's greatness and winning ways is this: In the 15 years between 1955 and 1969, Russell's teams could have won 16 championships: 2 NCAA Championships, 1 Olympic Gold, and 13 NBA Championships. They won 14 of those 16, only missing out in the 1958 and 1967 NBA seasons. That is bonkers.

Bill Russell was not even the 1st or 2nd top scorer on his Celtic teams; he did not have to be the top scorer like he was in college.

Bill Russell had several teammates who could score, not going to discredit his leadership and defense, but he was not the only reason those teams won.

Bill Sharman, Bob Cousy, Tom Heinsohn, Sam Jones, Bailey Howell and John Havlicek all were the leading scorers on those Celtic teams and all Hall of Famers too.

Bob Cousy led in assists for 4 straight years when they played together and john Havlicek won a couple championships without Russell too.

Imagine Hakeem Olajuwon didn't have to be the main guy scoring for his team and had a least 2 other players doing it all on offense, so he could focus more on defense like Bill Russell had with the Celtics.

I don't believe Bill Russell would even be in the Goat conversation if not for all those rings.

[Asian62150]

Bill Russell was not even the 1st or 2nd top scorer on his Celtic teams; he did not have to be the top scorer like he was in college.

Bill Russell had several teammates who could score, not going to discredit his leadership and defense, but he was not the only reason those teams won.

Bill Sharman, Bob Cousy, Tom Heinsohn, Sam Jones, Bailey Howell and John Havlicek all were the leading scorers on those Celtic teams and all Hall of Famers too.

Bob Cousy led in assists for 4 straight years when they played together and john Havlicek won a couple championships without Russell too.

Imagine Hakeem Olajuwon didn't have to be the main guy scoring for his team and had a least 2 other players doing it all on offense, so he could focus more on defense like Bill Russell had with the Celtics.

I don't believe Bill Russell would even be in the Goat conversation if not for all those rings.

Take away any top 5 player's rings and they wouldn't be in the GOAT conversation, either.

Maybe Bill Russell isn't the single greatest NBA player in terms of counting stats. But basketball is a team sport, and if the point is to win, one of the players you absolutely want on your team is Bill Russell.

Dude never lost a game 7. I think he's the only guy in the top 10 or even 20 who can say that.

[calmar]

Bill Russell was not even the 1st or 2nd top scorer on his Celtic teams; he did not have to be the top scorer like he was in college.

Bill Russell had several teammates who could score, not going to discredit his leadership and defense, but he was not the only reason those teams won.

Bill Sharman, Bob Cousy, Tom Heinsohn, Sam Jones, Bailey Howell and John Havlicek all were the leading scorers on those Celtic teams and all Hall of Famers too.

Bob Cousy led in assists for 4 straight years when they played together and john Havlicek won a couple championships without Russell too.

Imagine Hakeem Olajuwon didn't have to be the main guy scoring for his team and had a least 2 other players doing it all on offense, so he could focus more on defense like Bill Russell had with the Celtics.

I don't believe Bill Russell would even be in the Goat conversation if not for all those rings.

In addition to being the greatest winner ever, Russell did a lot better than you seem to think statistically. 15 points and 22.5 rebounds a game during the regular season, 16 points and 25 rebounds a game during the playoffs, and leading the league in Defensive Win Shares for 10 straight years is rather good.

[CommomSensei88]

In addition to being the greatest winner ever, Russell did a lot better than you seem to think statistically. 15 points and 22.5 rebounds a game during the regular season, 16 points and 25 rebounds a game during the playoffs, and leading the league in Defensive Win Shares for 10 straight years is rather good.

Bill Russell has the 2nd most career minutes per game All-Time with 42.3 in regular season.

The 2nd most career minutes per game All-Time with 45.4 in the Playoffs.

Those PPG numbers don't look that great for him having all those extra minutes playing.

I don't discredit his leadership or D, but he was not a great offensive player, Offensive win shares he is not even in the top 250.

Bill Russell had lots of help on offense to get most those rings.

[jcardstore]

I'll just note again that we have guys on a basketball forum comparing Dwyane Wade to Klay Thompson... Can always depend on Blowout for some great takes.

Nobody is comparing them :doh:

Why does "super team" have to be mutually exclusive? Warriors were a super team AND Heat were a super team.

[oldgoldy97]

I'll just note again that we have guys on a basketball forum comparing Dwyane Wade to Klay Thompson... Can always depend on Blowout for some great takes.

Don’t venture into the football section. Woof.

I will say, for all the hate the basketball section used to get, it’s probably the most sane of the three major sport sub forums now.

[exitmusicblue]

Kevin Durant?

My first thought.

Ditto. Next on all-time points list this season... MJ at #5.