Who would you put into the 50 Greatest Players list?

[1eyed_jack]

I know the list won't ever change and they will just add to it, but right now if you had to adjust their list, who do you take out and who do you replace them with?

Here is the current list

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar

Nate Archibald

Paul Arizin

Charles Barkley

Rick Barry

Elgin Baylor

Dave Bing

Larry Bird

Wilt Chamberlain

Bob Cousy

Dave Cowens

Billy Cunningham

Dave DeBusschere

Clyde Drexler

Julius Erving

Patrick Ewing

Walt Frazier

George Gervin

Hal Greer

John Havlicek

Elvin Hayes

Magic Johnson

Sam Jones

Michael Jordan

Jerry Lucas

Karl Malone

Moses Malone

Pete Maravich

Kevin McHale

George Mikan

Earl Monroe

Hakeem Olajuwon

Shaquille O'Neal

Robert Parish

Bob Pettit

Scottie Pippen

Willis Reed

Oscar Robertson

David Robinson

Bill Russell

Dolph Schayes

Bill Sharman

John Stockton

Isiah Thomas

Nate Thurmond

Wes Unseld

Bill Walton

Jerry West

Lenny Wilkens

James Worthy

[IronMonkey415]

I'll take James Worthy out. Him and his card almost tore this board apart....I hate him.
I'll replace it with Kobe.

[ToppsCollector1]

I dont think a change is needed, I was thinking of a few but then realized they were already on the list

[1eyed_jack]

I'm trying to think of current players that should be on the list.

Obviously Kobe Duncan and Lebron are a shoe-in

It'd be hard to leave off guys like
Jason Kidd
Steve Nash
Ray Allen

There's clearly more, but right there is 6 guys, 3 of which are a gimme that could be interchanged. Now it's a question of taking 6 guys off the list

[1eyed_jack]

I dont think a change is needed, I was thinking of a few but then realized they were already on the list

So you don't think Kobe or Duncan should be in there?

[ToppsCollector1]

So you don't think Kobe or Duncan should be in there?

not really, theyre still active so they could still do a lot more in the league before they finish. Until they retire id put some of these current guys on the list.

Especially the younger guys, they still have plenty of time to prove themselves worthy of joining the list

[1eyed_jack]

Well when the list was made some guys were still playing, so I don't think it's an issue. Just something for fun, like if basketball completely stopped today and was never played again, who gets on the list, who comes off

[SportsItUpCards]

If there was only one list ever of 50 greatest players.... i'd take out Bill Walton and add Kobe, and also take out James Worthy and add Lebron. There's pleanty to change around, and we could be here all day... just whatever came to mind.

[drob50]

Many of the guys on the list were still playing in 96, so leaving Kobe and Duncan out for that reason makes no sense!

[ToppsCollector1]

Well when the list was made some guys were still playing, so I don't think it's an issue. Just something for fun, like if basketball completely stopped today and was never played again, who gets on the list, who comes off

In that case I definetly would put some of the older guys like Kobe. But then you would still have to factor in all the changes the NBA has gone through such as adding the 3 point line and the other rules that have changed from say the 1950s NBA and the NBA of 2012-13

[Sikkcaden]

the fact Reggie Miller didn't make the list in the first place still miffs me.

[Nyfancam01]

No Iverson? No Kobe? No Duncan?

All 3 of them need to be there.

[Nyfancam01]

the fact Reggie Miller didn't make the list in the first place still miffs me.

Miller too!!! He should definitely be there.

[ronaldo943]

i would take out Michael Jordan and put in Brian Scalabrine

[SportsItUpCards]

Duncan & Garnett are fo shizzle!

Heck, i'll put Shaq in there again!! Two spots for him.

[mghbnz]

Duncan & Garnett are fo shizzle!

Heck, i'll put Shaq in there again!! Two spots for him.

definitely KG and BIG TIMMY look at some of the numbers they are still putting up. Its a thing a beauty.:D

[1eyed_jack]

So if people are talking about putting in

Kobe
Duncan
Lebron
Iverson
Miller
Garnett

then which 6 are coming out?

[penny1fan]

Miller too!!! He should definitely be there.

this list was created by the NBA in 1998 and all members were honered (for sure needs adjusted!)

[SportsItUpCards]

this list was created by the NBA in 1998 and all members were honered (for sure needs adjusted!)

They were announced by David Stern in 1996, and were honored in 1997 during all-star weekend.

Here's the amazing video! :cool: Never gets old... i've watched it MANY times.

NBA top 50 Greatest Players - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqopzbXrlbs&feature=player_embedded)

[penny1fan]

They were announced by David Stern in 1996, and were honored in 1997 during all-star weekend.

Here's the amazing video! :cool: Never gets old... i've watched it MANY times.

NBA top 50 Greatest Players - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqopzbXrlbs&feature=player_embedded)

thanks for the correction haha.I was just going off of my memory :p

[1eyed_jack]

Kind of crazy the list was announced in 1996 and Shaq was on it!

[SportsItUpCards]

thanks for the correction haha.I was just going off of my memory :p

No correction intended.... just giving you a quick smack down, that's all. HAHA jk :D

Yeah, that goes to show how good Shaq really was! And the NBA players, coaches and all the good folks already knew what he would turn out to be a BEAST, and animal! :flex:

[Nyfancam01]

Oh my god.. I didn't even notice Lebron being out. lol. He should be on any list.

[SportsItUpCards]

Oh my god.. I didn't even notice Lebron being out. lol. He should be on any list.

They should have added Lebron to the list when he was in Jr. High school!

[bullrose23]

i made a thread about the 75th anniversary of the nba and who should make the next cut nba 75 greatest
check it out

http://www.blowoutcards.com/forums/basketball/420759-year-2021-next-25-a.html

[NewVintageNY]

Current players that need to be on that list imo are

The undisputed

LeBron
Kobe
Garnett
Duncan

The soon to be

Durant will be on that list very soon.

Dirk, Pierce, Kidd, Wade, Ray Allen and Nash are close but arguments can be made.

A lot to prove

Dwight
CP3
Kyrie
Melo
Rose
Westbrook

Recently retired. Arguments can be made but they are pretty close.
Reggie Miller
Iverson

[fullmetal]

No Iverson? No Kobe? No Duncan?

All 3 of them need to be there.

Iverson? That isn't a funny joke.

[Nyfancam01]

^ha. smh at you if you think Allen Iverson doesn't belong there.. top 50 isn't even a question.

[lambeauleap87]

^ha. smh at you if you think Allen Iverson doesn't belong there.. top 50 isn't even a question.

Why should Iverson be in the Top 50?

[Nyfancam01]

haha wow.

Hey, go to NBA.com and check his stats.. 6'0 btw.

[lambeauleap87]

haha wow.

Hey, go to NBA.com and check his stats.. 6'0 btw.

"Go to NBA.com" doesn't answer my question...it's a simple, honest question. If you can't articulate an actual reason, well, you get it.

[jbmets95]

Completely agree....

my only few things would be questionable on pierce --> dont think he deserves to be on

and i think westbrook and kyrie should b 1 step below a lot to prove
and kd i think is undisputed...
Current players that need to be on that list imo are

The undisputed

LeBron
Kobe
Garnett
Duncan

The soon to be

Durant will be on that list very soon.

Dirk, Pierce, Kidd, Wade, Ray Allen and Nash are close but arguments can be made.

A lot to prove

Dwight
CP3
Kyrie
Melo
Rose
Westbrook

Recently retired. Arguments can be made but they are pretty close.
Reggie Miller
Iverson

[bmf]

the fact Reggie Miller didn't make the list in the first place still miffs me.

he wasn't even a first ballot hall of famer, never mind a top 50 player by 1996! what game are you following?

[bmf]

Iverson? That isn't a funny joke.

you don't think AI is a top 50 player? wow, just wow

[Nyfancam01]

People like you are extremely annoying sometimes... Did you watch Allen Iverson when he played? Maybe his prime?

Maybe the fact that he was the NBA rookie of the year, MVP in 2001 and took a truly weak sixers team to the Finals all alone, He was an eleven time NBA All Star, Led the league in steals 3 times, Led the league in Scoring FOUR times at his size, Two time All star game MVP, 3 Time All Nba first team, 3 Time All Nba second team..

If you think that Allen Iverson doesn't belong in the top 50, you didn't watch him or simply just dislike him. He is one of the most dominant players to EVER play the game.

6'0, an absolute beast. Forget top 50. I'll say top 10, top 15. Esp at his size.. Easily the greatest little man to ever play the game.

Allen Iverson is a legend. Only reason he is underrated and doesn't get enough credit from people like you is because of his "off the court issues".

Top 10 all time for me.
THE ANSWER.

[lambeauleap87]

People like you are extremely annoying sometimes... Did you watch Allen Iverson when he played? Maybe his prime?

Maybe the fact that he was the NBA rookie of the year, MVP in 2001 and took a truly weak sixers team to the Finals all alone, He was an eleven time NBA All Star, Led the league in steals 3 times, Led the league in Scoring FOUR times at his size, Two time All star game MVP, 3 Time All Nba first team, 3 Time All Nba second team..

If you think that Allen Iverson doesn't belong in the top 50, you didn't watch him or simply just dislike him. He is one of the most dominant players to EVER play the game.

6'0, an absolute beast. Forget top 50. I'll say top 10, top 15. Esp at his size.. Easily the greatest little man to ever play the game.

Allen Iverson is a legend. Only reason he is underrated and doesn't get enough credit from people like you is because of his "off the court issues".

Top 10 all time for me.
THE ANSWER.

People like me? I never said he didn't deserve a place in the top fifty, I simply asked you to articulate something rather than "SMH LOL". Iverson was a helluva card who could almost score at will and with killer quickness. He has a definite argument for being in the top 50, but is pretty far off from the top ten.

[1eyed_jack]

People like you are extremely annoying sometimes... Did you watch Allen Iverson when he played? Maybe his prime?

Maybe the fact that he was the NBA rookie of the year, MVP in 2001 and took a truly weak sixers team to the Finals all alone, He was an eleven time NBA All Star, Led the league in steals 3 times, Led the league in Scoring FOUR times at his size, Two time All star game MVP, 3 Time All Nba first team, 3 Time All Nba second team..

If you think that Allen Iverson doesn't belong in the top 50, you didn't watch him or simply just dislike him. He is one of the most dominant players to EVER play the game.

6'0, an absolute beast. Forget top 50. I'll say top 10, top 15. Esp at his size.. Easily the greatest little man to ever play the game.

Allen Iverson is a legend. Only reason he is underrated and doesn't get enough credit from people like you is because of his "off the court issues".

Top 10 all time for me.
THE ANSWER.

I'm sorry, I like Iverson but I just can't agree with this. I don't think there's any way Iverson is a top 10 player. I think he'd be borderline top 50, but certainly not top 10. I'm sure I'm missing a name or two, but who do you leave off this list for Iverson

Wilt
Jordan
Kobe
Kareem
Magic
Bird
Russell
Robertson
Hakeem
Shaq
Dr. J
Duncan
Stockton
Malone
West

So there's 15 names, in your opinion obviously, who are you leaving off in favor of Iverson?

[Nyfancam01]

People like me? I never said he didn't deserve a place in the top fifty, I simply asked you to articulate something rather than "SMH LOL". Iverson was a helluva card who could almost score at will and with killer quickness. He has a definite argument for being in the top 50, but is pretty far off from the top ten.

I am on break at work.. When you said something about stats not being enough (idk how they aren't?) I hate when people say stats arent enough or don't count.. haha

But yea, I said what I have to say... AI is in my top 10 but ofcourse he is my all time favorite player. I do think he is the best "little man" ever.

Have a great night...

[MikeMamba]

Iverson doesn't belong,

maybe half way his career he was destined but not anymore.

He'll make the HOF for sure though.

[knicks_please]

iverson was really good...but so was EVERYONE on the 50 greatest list. you could argue 1 on 1 with all of those guys reasons why the other guy was better...

[bmf]

Iverson doesn't belong,

maybe half way his career he was destined but not anymore.

He'll make the HOF for sure though.

lol way to go out on a limb there

[Nyfancam01]

I'm sorry, I like Iverson but I just can't agree with this. I don't think there's any way Iverson is a top 10 player. I think he'd be borderline top 50, but certainly not top 10. I'm sure I'm missing a name or two, but who do you leave off this list for Iverson

Wilt
Jordan
Kobe
Kareem
Magic
Bird
Russell
Robertson
Hakeem
Shaq
Dr. J
Duncan
Stockton
Malone
West

So there's 15 names, in your opinion obviously, who are you leaving off in favor of Iverson?

I'd take Iverson over J Erving, Duncan, Stockton easily, Malone and west... Slightly ahead of Tim Duncan.

Call me crazy, I don't care haha I am biased because he is my favorite player. And he IS the best little man to ever do it imo. So sure.. i'd prob have AI around my top 10.

[WillC]

I'd take Iverson over J Erving, Duncan, Stockton easily, Malone and west... Slightly ahead of Tim Duncan.

Oh wow.

I was a big Iverson fan and I still defend him (and I certainly think he belongs in the top 50 ever, as do most writers and analysts), but to have him above of Erving, Duncan, Malone, Stockton and West? That's unjustifiable.

[khouzza]

I will probably get slammed for this but what the heck...

Putting myself in 96 or 97 whenever the list was named the only change I would make would be to take out Billy Cunningham and replace him with Dennis Rodman....yes Dennis Rodman, in my opinion he is top 3 best around defensive player to ever play the game, an absolute beast in defense and as the old saying goes "good offense will win you the game but great defense will win you a championship". I think Rodman is that great, to the point where (relative to position) he is the only guy that could stop a player like lebron, I'm a heat and lebron fan so I'm not trying to start an arguement there. Just putting Rodman at his prime against lebron now and I think lebron would have a very quiet night lol. Just my opinion, great thread btw

[JOHNJOHNNY]

why should iverson be in the top 50?

^^^^ knows nothing about basketball

THE WORDS "TELL ME WHY "SHOULD NOT EVEN COME OUT OF YOUR MOUTH REFERING TO IVERSON BEING TOP 50.

[WillC]

Allen Iverson's all-time ranking in various publications:

Bill Simmons' Book of Basketball: 37th

Slam '500' magazine: 40th

Elliot Kalb's Who's Better, Who's Best?: 33rd

Basketball Reference's Hall of Fame Probability: 24th

[lambeauleap87]

^^^^ knows nothing about basketball

THE WORDS "TELL ME WHY "SHOULD NOT EVEN COME OUT OF YOUR MOUTH REFERING TO IVERSON BEING TOP 50.

You guys in the basketball section are really good at reading.

[NewVintageNY]

I'd take Iverson over J Erving, Duncan, Stockton easily, Malone and west... Slightly ahead of Tim Duncan.

Call me crazy, I don't care haha I am biased because he is my favorite player. And he IS the best little man to ever do it imo. So sure.. i'd prob have AI around my top 10.

I am not an Iverson fan but you have to respect him. I think he would tear Jerry West up in his prime.

Duncan is better than him hands down you can't even argue about that one.

Stockton I can see an argument.

I would take Malone over Iverson.

I would probably take Dr. J over him.

Even with that said I think he's a top 50 player hands down.

[WillC]

I am not an Iverson fan but you have to respect him. I think he would tear Jerry West up in his prime.

What makes you say that? I'm curious.

[Craig]

If I had to remove players to replace them with guys like Duncan, Kobe, AI, etc., here's who I'd choose to have replaced. No particular order:

Robert Parish
Nate Archibald
Paul Arizin
Jerry Lucas
Lenny Wilkens

They were all obviously great players, but I can't see putting any of them ahead of a guy like Kobe, Duncan, or Lebron. It's always tough deciding who to remove.

[fullmetal]

you don't think AI is a top 50 player? wow, just wow


Top 50 NBA player of all time? I don't believe so.

[groundsupport]

Top 50 NBA player of all time? I don't believe so.

Me neither.

Dirk deserves it more then AI does.

[burke23]

I like Reggie Miller, but I don't think he is a top 50 player of all time. Is he realling more deserving than someone like Alex English, even?

[IamRalpho]

I like Reggie Miller, but I don't think he is a top 50 player of all time. Is he realling more deserving than someone like Alex English, even?

Nope. Gonna have a tough time convincing me Reggie is a top 75, maybe 100 guy.

Glad others feel the same about Reggie, HOFer? Yes, top 50-100 guy? Not so sure

[NewVintageNY]

What makes you say that? I'm curious.

I don't think Jerry West would be able to cover him. Iverson is in my opinion the athletically superior player of the two. I'm not saying that just because West played in the 60's 70's. I would much rather have Oscar Robertson over Iverson so you don't think I have no respect for players of that era.

If you put Iverson in his prime playing against players in 1969 he would average over 40 points per game with ease. I don't even like him trust me I think he's an idiot but you can't deny what he accomplished on the court.

[IamRalpho]

In all honesty, no one from the 50s-70s could cover anyone from this generation. Its apples and bowling balls compared to the strength and athleticism the two generations have. Lebron and Shaq would destroy Russell and Wilt.

But in context, West was a top 10 player of all time for what he did. Allen Iverson is not.

[groundsupport]

Dirk is a top 50 lock for me. I'd even take him over KG if there was one spot left.

[NewVintageNY]

Dirk is a top 50 lock for me. I'd even take him over KG if there was one spot left.

You're crazy.

As for Iverson vs West if you say he would beat him in a match up then the discussion is over. I don't think Shaq would destroy Wilt or Russell. He is stronger but from a skill stand point those guys are just as good if not better than him.

Kevin Durant is a perfect example he can't bench 185lb's but he can torch you.

Iverson would torch West. Kobe would destroy West. So would LeBron and Durant.

Now from an accomplishment yes Jerry West did accomplish more but that is separate from who was the better player.

Bill Russell has more Championships than MJ who is better?

Jerry West is the logo of the NBA and has a ton of accomplishments etc but does that make him better than Durant because he has more accomplishments?

Jerry West is a more accomplished player than Iverson but Iverson was a better player and would in my opinion torch West.

Also to touch on my other point I respect the guys that played in the 50's, 60's and 70's. I would put Kareem, Big O, Wilt, and Russell all in the top 10 ever. Jerry West was a great player but LeBron would destroy him.

[groundsupport]

You're crazy.

As for Iverson vs West if you say he would beat him in a match up then the discussion is over. I don't think Shaq would destroy Wilt or Russell. He is stronger but from a skill stand point those guys are just as good if not better than him.

Kevin Durant is a perfect example he can't bench 185lb's but he can torch you.

Iverson would torch West. Kobe would destroy West. So would LeBron and Durant.

Now from an accomplishment yes Jerry West did accomplish more but that is separate from who was the better player.

Bill Russell has more Championships than MJ who is better?

Jerry West is the logo of the NBA and has a ton of accomplishments etc but does that make him better than Durant because he has more accomplishments?

Jerry West is a more accomplished player than Iverson but Iverson was a better player and would in my opinion torch West.

Also to touch on my other point I respect the guys that played in the 50's, 60's and 70's. I would put Kareem, Big O, Wilt, and Russell all in the top 10 ever. Jerry West was a great player but LeBron would destroy him.

Iverson is a locker room Cancer...

[WillC]

I don't think Jerry West would be able to cover him. Iverson is in my opinion the athletically superior player of the two. I'm not saying that just because West played in the 60's 70's. I would much rather have Oscar Robertson over Iverson so you don't think I have no respect for players of that era.

So you'd much rather have Oscar Robertson over Iverson? But you think Iverson would "tear up" Jerry West?

That makes no sense, since Robertson and West were nearly inseparable in terms of their legacies, and West was a far superior defender than Robertson.

I'm not sure if you know, but West was the premier defensive guard of the 1960s. He would have been All-Defensive 1st Team at least 10 times if the award existed back then and, other than perhaps Stockton, would have more steals than anyone in NBA history if they'd been recorded.

Here are some highlights of West's defensive abilities: Jerry West - The NBA Logo Career Tribute (Version 1.1) - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OEzwR1a8KuA&list=FL84D9r2Sttw_ghKiyTJKoaA&feature=player_detailpage#t=570s)

I think there are a lot of misconceptions about Jerry West (and other white players from years gone by).

Having said that, Iverson was so good offensively that most players (from any era) would struggle with him.

I'm just not sure why you singled out Jerry West - one of the best defenders ever.

If you put Iverson in his prime playing against players in 1969 he would average over 40 points per game with ease. I don't even like him trust me I think he's an idiot but you can't deny what he accomplished on the court.

I don't deny what Iverson accomplished. I think he was fantastic. Just no need to try to piss all over one of the greatest players ever (Jerry West).

[WillC]

In all honesty, no one from the 50s-70s could cover anyone from this generation.

That's a pretty outrageous statement.

So you don't think Walt Frazier could cover Steve Blake?

You don't think Bill Russell could defend Joel Anthony?

[IamRalpho]

That's a pretty outrageous statement.

So you don't think Walt Frazier could cover Steve Blake?

You don't think Bill Russell could defend Joel Anthony?

You know what I mean. Comparing the greats. Even though, yes I do think someone from 40 years ago would have trouble covering someone from this generation.

Night and day comparing it though. My point still stands.

[WillC]

You know what I mean. Comparing the greats. Even though, yes I do think someone from 40 years ago would have trouble covering someone from this generation.

Night and day comparing it though. My point still stands.

Surely Walt Frazier would still be an elite defender today? No?

Just curious, how much footage of him have you seen?

[knicks_please]

i'd like to see any back court from today or 20 years from today hold / score on walt frazier and earl monroe aka black jesus.

those two would clown the 'more athletic' players of today. its not a track meet, its a basketball game. walt would be able to hold any guard ever, period. players today take all of their game, whether directly or not from guys like frazier, monroe, oscar etc...

[IamRalpho]

Surely Walt Frazier would still be an elite defender today? No?

Just curious, how much footage of him have you seen?

Quite a bit, but that is still not my point. I am not just some fanboy spouting off for my favorite player here.

Athletes today are stronger and more conditioned than Walt Frazier and others from the 60s and 70s, they have played in much tougher competition throughout their careers.

I am the biggest Russell supporter here, but you can not compare generations like that. Its not even close. The athletes today would DESTROY people 30 years ago.

I dont understand why its so tough for anyone to see.

[WillC]

Athletes today are stronger and more conditioned than Walt Frazier and others from the 60s and 70s, they have played in much tougher competition throughout their careers.

Walt Frazier's defense was similar to Gary Payton's. Do you see much difference between those two players, defensively? How do you think Payton would do today? He'd still be perhaps the best defensive guard in the league, right?

So why do you think Frazier was such a sub-standard human being? Have humans really evolved that much since the 1970s?

I know the overall standard of athleticism has increased. But to suggest that Walt Frazier wouldn't cope today is kind of ridiculous.

Also, last time I checked, basketball isn't just about athleticism. Larry Bird was arguably the best player in the 1980s despite being one of the least athletic players in the NBA. He did just fine against uber-freaks like Dominique Wilkins and star forwards like James Worthy, Alex English, Adrian Dantley, etc.

I am the biggest Russell supporter here, but you can not compare generations like that. Its not even close. The athletes today would DESTROY people 30 years ago.

So DeAndre Jordan would destroy Kareem Abdul-Jabbar? (Even though Hakeem Olajuwon was unable to?)

That's interesting.

[knicks_please]

Walt Frazier did YOGA regularly for goodness sake...he was all about being physically and mentally at his peak. He was NOT slow by any means...not a doubt in my mind he could hold AI, Westbrook, rose, you name it. Had the size too.

[pac213up]

Dirk is a top 50 lock for me. I'd even take him over KG if there was one spot left.

Defense matters. Top 50 sure.....over KG.....not really close.

[NewVintageNY]

So you'd much rather have Oscar Robertson over Iverson? But you think Iverson would "tear up" Jerry West?

That makes no sense, since Robertson and West were nearly inseparable in terms of their legacies, and West was a far superior defender than Robertson.

I'm not sure if you know, but West was the premier defensive guard of the 1960s. He would have been All-Defensive 1st Team at least 10 times if the award existed back then and, other than perhaps Stockton, would have more steals than anyone in NBA history if they'd been recorded.

Here are some highlights of West's defensive abilities: Jerry West - The NBA Logo Career Tribute (Version 1.1) - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OEzwR1a8KuA&list=FL84D9r2Sttw_ghKiyTJKoaA&feature=player_detailpage#t=570s)

I think there are a lot of misconceptions about Jerry West (and other white players from years gone by).

Having said that, Iverson was so good offensively that most players (from any era) would struggle with him.

I'm just not sure why you singled out Jerry West - one of the best defenders ever.



I don't deny what Iverson accomplished. I think he was fantastic. Just no need to try to piss all over one of the greatest players ever (Jerry West).



I think it is widely agreed that Oscar Robertson was a better player than Jerry West. I am not bashing Jerry West he's a top 50 player but if I have to split hairs gimme Iverson.

Saying West was a far superior defender is not accurate. Oscar average a triple double one year. Defensively he was just as good as Jerry West. Based on nearly every ranking out there Oscar is better than Jerry West.

If I had to compare Jerry West to a guy that plays now it would probably be Ray Allen. Ray Allen is a great player but not as good as Iverson in his prime.

like I said we are splitting hairs but if you put Iverson in 1969 he would be a top 5 player of that generation behind Wilt Kareem Russell and Oscar. Jerry West would be right behind them.

[WillC]

I think it is widely agreed that Oscar Robertson was a better player than Jerry West. I am not bashing Jerry West he's a top 50 player but if I have to split hairs gimme Iverson.

Saying West was a far superior defender is not accurate. Oscar average a triple double one year. Defensively he was just as good as Jerry West. Based on nearly every ranking out there Oscar is better than Jerry West.

I'm afraid you're wrong on a number of things.

It is not widely agreed that Oscar Robertson was a better player than Jerry West. For example, Bill Simmons ranks West as the 9th best player of all-time, with Robertson one place behind him in 10th.

Saying that West was a far superior defender to Robertson is accurate, actually.

Robertson is one of my all-time favourite players but it's common knowledge that defense was not his forte. How does averaging a triple-double prove anything about his defensive ability? Meanwhile, West was a tremendous defender.

The All-Defensive Team selections started in 1968-69. Both West and Robertson played until 1973-74. Jerry West made the All-Defensive 1st Team 4 times. Oscar Robertson? Never made even the 2nd Team.

Here is a quote for you:

Bill Sharman: "Jerry West was a super defensive player besides being a super offensive player. Although they didn’t keep track of stats as they do today, I would say that Jerry West blocked more shots and had more steals than any guard who ever played in the NBA. He had those long arms and great quickness that was very deceptive until he stole the ball from you a few times… He is one of the very few players that was a true superstar on offense and defense."

Argue all you want, but Robertson wasn't on West's level defensively. In fact, I hate to say it, but I think you've fallen victim to basic racial stereotyping by labelling West a poor defender. A bit of research would soon prove otherwise.

[IamRalpho]

Walt Frazier's defense was similar to Gary Payton's. Do you see much difference between those two players, defensively? How do you think Payton would do today? He'd still be perhaps the best defensive guard in the league, right?

So why do you think Frazier was such a sub-standard human being? Have humans really evolved that much since the 1970s?

I know the overall standard of athleticism has increased. But to suggest that Walt Frazier wouldn't cope today is kind of ridiculous.

Also, last time I checked, basketball isn't just about athleticism. Larry Bird was arguably the best player in the 1980s despite being one of the least athletic players in the NBA. He did just fine against uber-freaks like Dominique Wilkins and star forwards like James Worthy, Alex English, Adrian Dantley, etc.



So DeAndre Jordan would destroy Kareem Abdul-Jabbar? (Even though Hakeem Olajuwon was unable to?)

That's interesting.

No point in arguing with you, you think you know more than others and I dont wanna get into a pissing match here. Think what you want, you guys take what I said whatever way you want.

Continue being the expert on the past WillC, I wont make any comments anymore.

[WillC]

No point in arguing with you, you think you know more than others and I dont wanna get into a pissing match here. Think what you want, you guys take what I said whatever way you want.

Continue being the expert on the past WillC, I wont make any comments anymore.

I read obsessively about basketball history. Nobody knows everything about the past, but I certainly feel qualified to discuss this issue.

You have your opinions and you're entitled to them. But unfortunately you've provided zero evidence to backup your claims.

You think Robertson was a better defender than West? Back it up with quotes from players and observers from their time period, or statistics, or awards.

Don't just tell me "he averaged a triple double" and expect that to convince me. [Edit: Just realised DanONeill7 said that, not IamRalpho]

Here's Jerry West's (notoriously humble) take on the issue:

"Who’s better, Oscar or me? This is the one single question that has been asked more often that any other since I’ve been playing basketball. And it is really for others to decide, if it can be decided. But I personally have always felt that Oscar was the best.

He has had two big advantages over me. Number one: while we play the same position, he has greater size, which gives him some advantages. And number two: he’s a better ballhandler and passer. That’s for sure. I think we’re about equal as shooters. I’m a better outside shooter, but Oscar is better inside. I may have two advantages over him. One, I’m better defensively. And two (and I’m being so honest about this that it scares me a little), I do believe I’ve played better and done more than he has in certain situations when it counts the most."

[dasiegel]

you really can't take off people, you can only add or expand the list. becasue most of us never saw paul arizin play, and we can't discount george mikan just because the game has evolved. of course some people today could in theory knock guys off the list: nash, pierce, kobe, garnett, lebron, durant, carmelo, duncan and another 5-6 guys could push dave bing or tiny archibald off the list but that's not fair to them and the impact they had at the time they played.

the only real snub i see from the 1st 50 was dominique wilkins who should be there over about 5 people on the list.

[bdoody42]

I just lol'ed at someone saying Iverson is a top 10 all time player. Very bias opinion or ill informed.

[Orangejello727]

i'd like to see any back court from today or 20 years from today hold / score on walt frazier and earl monroe aka black jesus.

those two would clown the 'more athletic' players of today. its not a track meet, its a basketball game. walt would be able to hold any guard ever, period. players today take all of their game, whether directly or not from guys like frazier, monroe, oscar etc...

2 way street my main man.

THe rough player would have them fouled out of games today. Yester year guys would physically demolish todays players but foul out.

Todays guys would run circles around yesteryear guys.

Time, technology and medicine advanements have made for different type of atheletes today. Just check out the olympic stats over the past 3 decades and time.

What I dont understand is how Pete Maravich makes the top 50 list. What did the guy do profressionally that gives gets him on the top 50?

[dasiegel]

2 way street my main man.

THe rough player would have them fouled out of games today. Yester year guys would physically demolish todays players but foul out.

Todays guys would run circles around yesteryear guys.

Time, technology and medicine advanements have made for different type of atheletes today. Just check out the olympic stats over the past 3 decades and time.

What I dont understand is how Pete Maravich makes the top 50 list. What did the guy do profressionally that gives gets him on the top 50?

i dont agree with everything you said esp with the strength some of these guards have today but as far as pete maravich im with you. its not his fault but his career was too short lived to be considered in that category as legendary as some of his moves and games were.

[murrke03]

I'm sorry but there is some blatant nostalgia going on in here. haha

Frazier, Russell and Wilt are all great and taking context into account they probably are just as 'great' as the best of today. But anyone saying Frazier could guard the greats of today no problem is nuts.

Just watch the 'game' of the 70's. No one on this court would stand a chance at keeping up with Russell Westbrook and the greats of this era.

Walt "Clyde" Frazier 36 pts,19 ast, nba finals 1970 knicks vs lakers game 7 - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYVjltXc5F8)


The greats of the past were no doubt amazing players when taking into the context of the game and the eras they played. But if someone is trying to say that Frazier of 1970 could guard the players of today. Yikes...

[WillC]

It'll be funny in 40 years time when people look back at LeBron James and say "if someone is trying to say that LeBron of 2013 could guard the players of today. Yikes..."

[the34truth]

It'll be funny in 40 years time when people look back at LeBron James and say "if someone is trying to say that LeBron of 2013 could guard the players of today. Yikes..."
:)! :)! :)!

[murrke03]

It'll be funny in 40 years time when people look back at LeBron James and say "if someone is trying to say that LeBron of 2013 could guard the players of today. Yikes..."

Depends where the game is at in 40 years. If the style of play and athleticism of the athletes changes as much as it has in the past 40 years then it won't be hard to imagine at all.

For someone that watches a lot of tape of the game I am shocked that you watch it and think those guys could compete 'as is' with the current players in the league.

[WillC]

For someone that watches a lot of tape of the game I am shocked that you watch it and think those guys could compete 'as is' with the current players in the league.

The majority of players from the 1950s and 60s wouldn't get a look in today. However, the stars of the 1960s and 70s would still be very good players today. No doubt in my mind.

Let me prove my point:

An ageing Wilt Chamberlain and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar battled each other neck-to-neck.

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar battled Hakeem Olajuwon neck-to-neck.

Hakeem Olajuwon outplayed Shaq (but, being kind to Shaq, he was young at the time, so let's call it a draw).

An ageing Shaq battled Dwight Howard neck-to-neck.

So, using those 'bridge' players, it's easy to see how superstars of bygone eras could still compete today.

Sure, they'd need to adjust to the rule changes and, yes, perhaps they would need to get used to different weight-training and nutritional information, but there's no doubt in my mind that the superstars of the past would still be great players today.

[WillC]

Legendary former NBA referee Norm Drucker put it best:

“The evolution of pro basketball keeps jumping to higher horizons. Although there have been great players throughout the history of the league, the present-day players are no doubt faster, bigger, and stronger. I don’t think the teams of the fifties and sixties could play as a team today. However, the individual stars, such as Oscar Robertson, Jim Pollard, Wilt Chamberlain, Tom Gola, Paul Arizin, Jerry West, Bob Cousy, Bob Davies, George Mikan, Bob Pettit, Bill Russell, Nate Thurmond and Rick Barry, John Havlicek, and Elgin Baylor – and a host of others – could very well fit in and be stars in today’s game.”

[knicks_please]

The majority of players from the 1950s and 60s wouldn't get a look in today. However, the stars of the 1960s and 70s would still be very good players today. No doubt in my mind.

Let me prove my point:

An ageing Wilt Chamberlain and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar battled each other neck-to-neck.

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar battled Hakeem Olajuwon neck-to-neck.

Hakeem Olajuwon outplayed Shaq (but, being kind to Shaq, he was young at the time, so let's call it a draw).

An ageing Shaq battled Dwight Howard neck-to-neck.

So, using those 'bridge' players, it's easy to see how superstars of bygone eras could still compete today.

Sure, they'd need to adjust to the rule changes and, yes, perhaps they would need to get used to different weight-training and nutritional information, but there's no doubt in my mind that the superstars of the past would still be great players today.

exactly, i was thinking that kareem basically DID play in both eras...

[murrke03]

The majority of players from the 1950s and 60s wouldn't get a look in today. However, the stars of the 1960s and 70s would still be very good players today. No doubt in my mind.

Let me prove my point:

An ageing Wilt Chamberlain and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar battled each other neck-to-neck.

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar battled Hakeem Olajuwon neck-to-neck.

Hakeem Olajuwon outplayed Shaq (but, being kind to Shaq, he was young at the time, so let's call it a draw).

An ageing Shaq battled Dwight Howard neck-to-neck.

So, using those 'bridge' players, it's easy to see how superstars of bygone eras could still compete today.

Sure, they'd need to adjust to the rule changes and, yes, perhaps they would need to get used to different weight-training and nutritional information, but there's no doubt in my mind that the superstars of the past would still be great players today.

I don't think your little equation proves anything. After enough bridges you can prove similarity between any two things. That still doesn't mean A and Z are similar.

Take a look at the footage. 1970 Walt Frazier would not be able to guard Russell Westbrook. The game has changed way to much.

Now 1970 Frazier training in current day and have all the benefits of todays technology and training of athletes for his entire life probably would be able to compete. But that's something different.

[EMD34]

I'd take Iverson over J Erving, Duncan, Stockton easily, Malone and west... Slightly ahead of Tim Duncan.

Call me crazy, I don't care haha I am biased because he is my favorite player. And he IS the best little man to ever do it imo. So sure.. i'd prob have AI around my top 10.

You are crazy.

[WillC]

Take a look at the footage. 1970 Walt Frazier would not be able to guard Russell Westbrook. The game has changed way to much.

Firstly, I don't think anyone is able to defend Westbrook man-to-man under today's rules. It takes a team effort to contain a player of Westbrook's abilities (same goes for Derrick Rose). You know that, I'm sure.

However, man-to-man, there aren't many players in NBA history I'd choose over Frazier when it comes to defending Westbrook. Frazier had the stamina, quick hands and quick feet to at least cause Westbrook some trouble.

It goes back to what I was saying. How do you think Payton would do against Westbrook? As well as anyone, right?

Well what makes Payton any better defensively than Frazier? In terms of athleticism, stature and defensive ability, they were mighty similar.

[knicks_please]

Firstly, I don't think anyone is able to defend Westbrook man-to-man under today's rules. It takes a team effort to contain a player of Westbrook's abilities (same goes for Derrick Rose). You know that, I'm sure.

However, man-to-man, there aren't many players in NBA history I'd choose over Frazier when it comes to defending Westbrook. Frazier had the stamina, quick hands and quick feet to at least cause Westbrook some trouble.

It goes back to what I was saying. How do you think Payton would do against Westbrook? As well as anyone, right?

Well what makes Payton any better defensively than Frazier? In terms of athleticism, stature and defensive ability, they were mighty similar.


fraizer knew HOW TO PLAY DEFENSE. He would take westbrook off of his game, and force him to do the things he doesnt want to do. he would funnel him towards willis reed if he felt like going to the basket. people are severely underrating what players from the 70's could do today. and you're right NOBODY can guard westbrook with todays rules, same with KD especially, because you can't breathe on the dude. westbrook guards himself basically by taking horrible shots when he should just go to the rack. Walt would dare him to shoot, then torch him on the other end, he's much bigger than westbrook.

[murrke03]

Firstly, I don't think anyone is able to defend Westbrook man-to-man under today's rules. It takes a team effort to contain a player of Westbrook's abilities (same goes for Derrick Rose). You know that, I'm sure.

However, man-to-man, there aren't many players in NBA history I'd choose over Frazier when it comes to defending Westbrook. Frazier had the stamina, quick hands and quick feet to at least cause Westbrook some trouble.

It goes back to what I was saying. How do you think Payton would do against Westbrook? As well as anyone, right?

Well what makes Payton any better defensively than Frazier? In terms of athleticism, stature and defensive ability, they were mighty similar.

Frazier had quick hands, quick feet, etc in context of him playing in the 1970's.

Watch the film and compare it to todays game. In the context of the 70's yes Frazier was an athletic beast but compared to watching the game now he's its not close.

I'm sure you have seen the video I posted above multiple times. That style is extremely slow compared to anything in the game today.

[WillC]

On a related note to this topic, I recently read someone say that Larry Bird wouldn't cope in today's NBA due to his lack of athleticism.

I thought to myself "who would be the best defender in NBA history to put on Larry Bird?"

My answer: Scottie Pippen.

Well, Bird used to torch Pippen (25.9ppg, 8.3rpg, 6.1apg and .503 FG% in 14 games against Pippen), so I'm 100% confident he'd be just as effective in 2013 as he was in 1987.

Video footage of Pippen trying to defend Bird: Larry Bird vs Scottie Pippen - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZzTffhlEvQg)

Like I said, humans haven't evolved in just a few decades. And the rules haven't changed that much either, neither has the overall standard of play.

The legends would be superstars no matter when they played.

[knicks_please]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYVjltXc5F8

doesn't look too terribly different to me...save the HD cameras...
36 19 and 7.

[murrke03]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYVjltXc5F8

doesn't look too terribly different to me...save the HD cameras...
36 19 and 7.

i just posted that.

And you don't think the style and pace of the game is different then today?

[knicks_please]

i just posted that.

And you don't think the style and pace of the game is different then today?

the style is a bit different, but different teams play at different paces. it's not as different as you make it out to be. that knicks team is whipping the ball around, which is why they were dominating the lakers in that game.
is it a track meet? is the only thing that matters 'speed'? Walt frazier was much smarter and craftier than russell westbrook. no doubt in my mind he would figure out a way to guard him. he has quick enough feet to stay in front of westbrook, no doubt. so why would westbrook just dominate him? i dont understand.

[WillC]

Kevin Johnson was just as athletic as Russell Westbrook.

Payton coped with him ok, as I'm sure Frazier would have done.

[murrke03]

the style is a bit different, but different teams play at different paces. it's not as different as you make it out to be. that knicks team is whipping the ball around, which is why they were dominating the lakers in that game.
is it a track meet? is the only thing that matters 'speed'? Walt frazier was much smarter and craftier than russell westbrook. no doubt in my mind he would figure out a way to guard him. he has quick enough feet to stay in front of westbrook, no doubt. so why would westbrook just dominate him? i dont understand.

There is a reason no one plays this 'style' anymore.

Quick in 1970 is slow in 2010. Sorry.

[knicks_please]

There is a reason no one plays this 'style' anymore.

Quick in 1970 is slow in 2010. Sorry.

sorry, but the spurs of today look a lot like the knicks of 1970 and 73.

[murrke03]

Kevin Johnson was just as athletic as Russell Westbrook.

Payton coped with him ok, as I'm sure Frazier would have done.

debatable.

but payton 1990 is an entirely different player then frazier 1970. Do you have a bridge equation for that one. Just assuming they are similar is a HUGE assumption.

[murrke03]

sorry, but the spurs of today look a lot like the knicks of 1970 and 73.

yes Ginobili and tony parker look a lot like that tape. :rolleyes:

LOL

[WillC]

There is a reason no one plays this 'style' anymore.

Quick in 1970 is slow in 2010. Sorry.

Julius Erving started playing professional basketball in 1971.

I guess athletic in 1971 is unathletic in 2010, right?

:rolleyes:

[knicks_please]

yes Ginobili and tony parker look a lot like that tape. :rolleyes:

LOL

you're right, frazier and monroe would destroy them.

[murrke03]

Julius Erving started playing professional basketball in 1971.

I guess athletic in 1971 is unathletic in 2010, right?

:rolleyes:

hahahaha I wasn't talking about julius erving but okay :)!

[knicks_please]

Ultimate Earl "The Pearl" Monroe MIX - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OkQrtrlQYpI)

pleeeeease tell me earl monroe looks slow compared to todays players...

[murrke03]

you're right, frazier and monroe would destroy them.

destroy them at what?

lol

[knicks_please]

destroy them at what?

lol

checkers...
have a nice day murrke:)!

[WillC]

hahahaha I wasn't talking about julius erving but okay :)!

Never said you were.

You said "Quick in 1970 is slow in 2010. Sorry."

Erving is an example of an athletic marvel from 1971 who's athleticism is still off the charts by today's standards.

Do you think Tiny Archibald would be 'slow' in today's game? How about Calvin Murphy? Both were ultra fast.

So your quote isn't really true, is it?

[bmf]

^^^^ knows nothing about basketball

THE WORDS "TELL ME WHY "SHOULD NOT EVEN COME OUT OF YOUR MOUTH REFERING TO IVERSON BEING TOP 50.

well said sir

[murrke03]

Never said you were.

You said "Quick in 1970 is slow in 2010. Sorry."

Erving is an example of an athletic marvel from 1971 who's athleticism is still off the charts by today's standards.

Do you think Tiny Archibald would be 'slow' in today's game? How about Calvin Murphy? Both were ultra fast.

So your quote isn't really true, is it?

I was simplifying my idea. Do you not understand that?

Of course you need to morph that to fit your bill. Erving at his time was top of athleticism. Above probably 90% of the guys he played against if not more. Today, that would not be the case.

The game today is faster, stronger, and more athletic. That doesn't mean that a couple players here and there wouldn't fit. But back then the majority of players would have no shot in the nba due to sheer physical/athleticism limits.

[WillC]

The game today is faster, stronger, and more athletic. That doesn't mean that a couple players here and there wouldn't fit. But back then the majority of players would have no shot in the nba due to sheer physical/athleticism limits.

Oh ok. Looks like we completely agree with each other after all.

Thanks for your time ;)

[murrke03]

Oh ok. Looks like we completely agree with each other after all.

Thanks for your time ;)

and like i said. frazier isn't one of them. :)!

erving dominated with athleticism. just cause he could fit today though doesn't mean he'd dominate.

[WillC]

and like i said. frazier isn't one of them. :)!

Strange. Could have sworn he was the best guard of the 1970s. I guess you must know of lots of better players from that era :rolleyes:

[murrke03]

Strange. Could have sworn he was the best guard of the 1970s. I guess you must know of lots of better players from that era :rolleyes:

i think you are lost.

[WillC]

i think you are lost.

If you say so ;)

I've made my point. Let's agree to disagree :)

[knicks_please]

Strange. Could have sworn he was the best guard of the 1970s. I guess you must know of lots of better players from that era :rolleyes:

hahaha dude is a brick wall, don't bother. he doesn't know jack about Walt Frazier obviously!

[murrke03]

hahaha dude is a brick wall, don't bother. he doesn't know jack about Walt Frazier obviously!

and you know him so well i guess.

we are watching the same film. :)!

[knicks_please]

and you know him so well i guess.

we are watching the same film. :)!

apparently not :)!

[murrke03]

apparently not :)!

you tell me. You think 1970's style of basketball is still played today and the style of game was just as fast.

Maybe your video player is stuck on fast forward ;)

[knicks_please]

you tell me. You think 1970's style of basketball is still played today and the style of game was just as fast.

Maybe your video player is stuck on fast forward ;)

I think I'm done arguing with ya because you'd find a way to argue that 2+2=5...so we can agree to disagree or you win or whatever because it's useless :).

[murrke03]

I think I'm done arguing with ya because you'd find a way to argue that 2+2=5...so we can agree to disagree or you win or whatever because it's useless :).

no not really.

1970's basketball is slow compared to 2010 basketball though

[knicks_please]

no not really.

1970's basketball is slow compared to 2010 basketball though

and Walt Frazier couldn't exist today either, mkay, I got it! thanks for the history lesson, thee of infinite wisdom!

[WillC]

no not really.

1970's basketball is slow compared to 2010 basketball though

And yet the scoring was higher in the 1970s with more shot attempts, more possessions, more end-to-end basketball.

You really need to do some homework dude.

[knicks_please]

And yet the scoring was higher in the 1970s with more shot attempts, more possessions, more end-to-end basketball.

You really need to do some homework dude.

don't hold your breath...

[WillC]

don't hold your breath...

You're right. I mean, why bother actually researching the history of the game? After all, they were all caveman back then who couldn't run or jump. Much better to just watch today's game and make assumptions about the past, don't ya think? :cool:

[knicks_please]

You're right. I mean, why bother actually researching the history of the game? After all, they were all caveman back then who couldn't run or jump. Much better to just watch today's game and make assumptions about the past, don't ya think? :cool:

well obviously. murrke does and he doesn't posses the ability to be wrong, that seems like the way to go! why be wrong ever, when you could be right all the time!

[Orangejello727]

are you guys trying to argue that 60s / 70s are or were faster than todays guys? Or the fact that medicine and technology hasnt changed in 50 yrs to make better and more athletic players?

Just do a comparison of times in the olympics and see exactly what im talking about. in the 60s no guy could crack the 11 second barrier in the 100m dash. Today 13 yrs can crack it without running professionally. I guess if that isnt a test of time and advancement, I dont know what it.

If the top 50 greatest player of all time was made in the year 2020, Im willing to bet some of those names no longer would be in there and would be replaced by others.

[WillC]

For my last post of the day, I'll let Larry Bird do the talking:

"All I know is that people tend to forget how great the older great players were," says Bird. "It'll happen that way with me, too."

[WillC]

are you guys trying to argue that 60s / 70s are or were faster than todays guys?

TROLL!

Find one example of where anyone said that?

Nice try, 10/10 for effort.

Right, bed time. I'll let the trolls do their thing :)!

[knicks_please]

are you guys trying to argue that 60s / 70s are or were faster than todays guys?

No. I'm just trying to say that Walt Frazier would have been a stud today just like he was in the 1970s...

[Orangejello727]

No. I'm just trying to say that Walt Frazier would have been a stud today just like he was in the 1970s...

And westbrook would have have dominated the league back in the 70s. Its all the same!!

Taking players out of era is virtually impossible to compare. You are better off comparing players within their era. With rule changes, player adaptation and game change, way too much to cut out and put in in order to get a similar comparison.

You said earlier that this wasnt a track meet and speed could possibly not have such an important emphasis. I disagree. If you a player from the 70s cannot have that speed, how is he able to get back to defend? Everything makes a difference.

If they did a greatest top 50 players in 1960 there would be a list. If they updated that list in 1970, im sure guys would get booted and guys would be added. In the 80s then to the 90s. Off to the 00s. Every decade guys would get replaced with newer guys. It just so happens the intial list was done 2 decades ago. Im willing to bet that list looks different in 20 yrs from now.

[Orangejello727]

All but 1 guy in this whole thread has Dennis Rodman on the list. Arguably the best rebounder the game has ever seen and a single person sees it.

Still waiting on someone to answer why Pete Maravich makes the list.

[murrke03]

And yet the scoring was higher in the 1970s with more shot attempts, more possessions, more end-to-end basketball.

You really need to do some homework dude.

more shot attempts equates to athleticism????

uh....

[pac213up]

This is why it is so difficult to compare across generations. Even though players are faster today, the rules allowed the defender to neutralize that asset much more effectively back then. There is a reason today's game is being dominated by some of the smaller players and there are so few true big men and it is tied directly to what a defender is and is not allowed to do and how to exploit that from an offensive perspective.

[fullmetal]

All but 1 guy in this whole thread has Dennis Rodman on the list. Arguably the best rebounder the game has ever seen and a single person sees it.

Still waiting on someone to answer why Pete Maravich makes the list.

His NCAA career probably carries him into the HOF. Plus the aura of his life. Not sure about the top 50 NBA/ABA players.

Not agreeing/disagreeing with his inclusion. Just a quick thought.

[Orangejello727]

His NCAA career probably carries him into the HOF. Plus the aura of his life. Not sure about the top 50 NBA/ABA players.

Not agreeing/disagreeing with his inclusion. Just a quick thought.

There are atleast 10 guys that I would take Rodman over on the top 50 list. Including Pete Maravich. I still dont understand what Pete did to warrant Top 50 status? The guy played 10 seasons holding virtually no records.

[knicks_please]

There are atleast 10 guys that I would take Rodman over on the top 50 list. Including Pete Maravich. I still dont understand what Pete did to warrant Top 50 status? The guy played 10 seasons holding virtually no records.

I could go with ya on Maravich...but who else?

[fullmetal]

There are atleast 10 guys that I would take Rodman over on the top 50 list. Including Pete Maravich. I still dont understand what Pete did to warrant Top 50 status? The guy played 10 seasons holding virtually no records.

Oops. My comment was about Pete, not Rodman.

I am biased against Rodman for the way he acted in San Antonio.

[Orangejello727]

I could go with ya on Maravich...but who else?

Id have to sit down and go through the list. But im afraid of listing them which could erupt a riot because I would be taking off a bunch of players on the list that some people idol very greatly for whatever odd reason.

But I do rank the worm higher than Worthy, Isiah Thomas, Maravich, Greer, Gervin, lucas, etc. I rank Kobe/Duncan higher than those guys and they are still playing.

[WillC]

But I do rank the worm higher than Worthy, Isiah Thomas, Maravich, Greer, Gervin, lucas, etc. I rank Kobe/Duncan higher than those guys and they are still playing.

I can see an argument for Rodman over some of those players, but not over Isiah Thomas. Please can you tell us your reasoning?

[Orangejello727]

I can see an argument for Rodman over some of those players, but not over Isiah Thomas. Please can you tell us your reasoning?

For his size, simply the best rebounder in the game in my opinion. Accompanied by

5× NBA champion (1989–1990, 1996–1998)
2× NBA Defensive Player of the Year (1990–1991)
2× NBA All-Star (1990, 1992)
2× All-NBA Third Team (1992, 1995)
7× All-Defensive First Team (1989–1993, 1995–1996)
All-Defensive Second Team (1994)
7× NBA rebounding champion (1992–1998)

He has to go down as one of the greatest of all time for his rebounding abilities.

[WillC]

As a Bulls fan, I also rate Dennis Rodman highly. I like the fact that he did the small things to help his team win.

However, Isiah Thomas was on another level. He was a 12-time All-Star, 3-time All-NBA 1st Team, 2-time All-NBA 2nd Team, and generally regarded as the best player on two championship teams.

In terms of unique skills, while Rodman might be the greatest rebounder ever (or one of), Thomas was perhaps the greatest dribbler ever (or one of).

There are perhaps only two better PGs in basketball history: Magic Johnson and Oscar Robertson.

Whereas there are many better PFs than Rodman: Tim Duncan, Karl Malone, Bob Pettit, Kevin Garnett, Charles Barkley, Dirk Nowitzki, etc.

[Orangejello727]

As a Bulls fan, I also rate Dennis Rodman highly. I like the fact that he did the small things to help his team win.

However, Isiah Thomas was on another level. He was a 12-time All-Star, 3-time All-NBA 1st Team, 2-time All-NBA 2nd Team, and generally regarded as the best player on two championship teams.

In terms of unique skills, while Rodman might be the greatest rebounder ever (or one of), Thomas was perhaps the greatest dribbler ever (or one of).

There are perhaps only two better PGs in basketball history: Magic Johnson and Oscar Robertson.

Whereas there are many better PFs than Rodman: Tim Duncan, Karl Malone, Bob Pettit, Kevin Garnett, Charles Barkley, Dirk Nowitzki, etc.

And how many of those PF were better rebounders than the worm?

[WillC]

And how many of those PF were better rebounders than the worm?

Barkley out-rebounded Rodman for the Worm's first five years in the league. Even on a per-36 minute basis they were similar.

But looking just at rebounds is cherry-picking. After all, even if Rodman got 4 or 5 more rebounds per game than Barkley and Malone, those two outscored him by about 20ppg each season, not to mention a further 3apg advantage over Rodman.

Defensively obviously Rodman had the edge.

But, at their primes, would the Suns/Sixers have traded Barkley for Rodman? Would the Jazz have traded Malone for Rodman? I have a hard time imagining they would.

Meanwhile, do the Pistons/Spurs/Bulls trade Rodman for Barkley or Malone? Without much hesitation, I'm sure.

But that's just my opinion. Who's to know for sure.

What I do know is that in a survey of GMs in the mid-1990s, they ranked Barkley and Malone above Rodman as the best power forwards in the NBA at the time.

And in the years since, I have yet to see any publications rank Rodman anywhere near Malone or Barkley (I can share the results if you want).

But I know you're not trying to say that Rodman was better than them. I'm just pointing out that there were better PFs in the NBA during Rodman's time, let alone in other eras.

Whereas there are probably only two PGs in NBA history better than Isiah Thomas. He was somewhat unfortunate that his NBA career overlapped with Magic Johnson's. And, even then, his Pistons were able to beat the Lakers in the 1989 NBA Finals.

[Orangejello727]

Ive got no rebuttal to that. Its unfortunate that guys like Dennis Rodman get little attention because the players at his Position are that much better. I dont advocating replacing guys like Barkley/Malone/TD in place of Dennis. I advocate placing him on the list of the greatest because of his ability that goes unoticed because of is positional players he is compared to.

[WillC]

Ive got no rebuttal to that. Its unfortunate that guys like Dennis Rodman get little attention because the players at his Position are that much better. I dont advocating replacing guys like Barkley/Malone/TD in place of Dennis. I advocate placing him on the list of the greatest because of his ability that goes unoticed because of is positional players he is compared to.

Adding weight to your pro-Rodman argument, you can see that, in 1997, comparative to other positions, the NBA named a surprisingly low number of power forwards in its 50 greatest players list. Also, even at the time, I think it was debatable whether Dave DeBusschere was truly one of the 50 best players ever (I'd have taken small forward Dominique Wilkins or center/forward Bob McAdoo over him). Of course in the years since we've seen Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett and Dirk Nowitzki come along, so that has boosted the overall quality of the power forward position.

Red = Recent players who deserve consideration in the future

Green = Omitted players who deserve consideration in the future

NBA's 50 Greatest Players (by position):

Point Guard

Magic Johnson
Oscar Robertson
Isiah Thomas
Bob Cousy
John Stockton
Walt Frazier
Tiny Archibald
Lenny Wilkens
Dave Bing
Jason Kidd
Gary Payton
Steve Nash
Chris Paul
Kevin Johnson
Tony Parker
Slater Martin
Bob Davies

Shooting Guard

Michael Jordan
Oscar Robertson
Jerry West
George Gervin
Clyde Drexler
Sam Jones
Pete Maravich
Hal Greer
Bill Sharman
Earl Monroe
Kobe Bryant
Dwyane Wade
Allen Iverson
Ray Allen
Tracy McGrady
Reggie Miller
Dennis Johnson
David Thompson
Joe Dumars

Small Forward

Larry Bird
Elgin Baylor
Julius Erving
John Havlicek
Rick Barry
Scottie Pippen
Paul Arizin
Billy Cunningham
James Worthy
LeBron James
Paul Pierce
Carmelo Anthony
Kevin Durant
Dominique Wilkins
Alex English
Adrian Dantley
Bernard King
Joe Fulks
Jim Pollard
Connie Hawkins

Power Forward

Bob Pettit
Karl Malone
Charles Barkley
Dolph Schayes
Elvin Hayes
Kevin McHale
Jerry Lucas
Dave DeBusschere
Tim Duncan
Kevin Garnett
Dirk Nowitzki
Chris Webber
Tom Heinsohn
Dan Issel
Dennis Rodman
Vern Mikkelsen
Maurice Stokes

Center

Bill Russell
Wilt Chamberlain
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
Shaquille O'Neal
Hakeem Olajuwon
Moses Malone
George Mikan
David Robinson
Dave Cowens
Willis Reed
Patrick Ewing
Wes Unseld
Nate Thurmond
Robert Parish
Bill Walton
Dwight Howard
Alonzo Mourning
Yao Ming
Bob McAdoo
Bob Lanier
Neil Johnston
Artis Gilmore
Walt Bellamy
Ed Macauley

[indyguy]

I don't know that I could ever vote for Dwight Howard on that list. Especially with the other Centers involved.

[knicks_please]

Id have to sit down and go through the list. But im afraid of listing them which could erupt a riot because I would be taking off a bunch of players on the list that some people idol very greatly for whatever odd reason.

But I do rank the worm higher than Worthy, Isiah Thomas, Maravich, Greer, Gervin, lucas, etc. I rank Kobe/Duncan higher than those guys and they are still playing.

Lol, speak your mind man! I think the argument could be made with most of those guys, prob not Isaiah and Jerry Lucas who put up some dumb numbers too, similar rebounding to rodman which you can't say about most players. Also Lucas was an amazing outside shooter...if he had played with a 3 point line he would have been like Kevin love x 100!