Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Who is the greatest basketball player of all-time?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    S.R. wrote: View Post
    Kareem has an NBA-record 6 MVP's. Six. Next highest is Jordan at 5.

    How can anyone argue Kareem wasn't "the man"?

    Kareem's 6 MVP's, 6 rings, and 1 all time scoring title is a pretty damn strong argument.

    I for one am not at all interested in hypotheticals in the GOAT argument. There are way too many. You have to debate what these guys actually accomplished, and what Kareem did is right up there.
    kareem has a great resume for sure. i have him third on my list. the knock i would have against him is that the era in which he was unquestionably the best player absolutely sucked in comparison to the era's that immediately preceded and followed it. who was even the second best player in the 70's? bob mcadoo? walt frazier? old hondo? probably walton for two of those years before his body gave out.

    the real second best player of that decade was dr j, who won two titles and three mvp's... in the ABA. rick barry, george gervin, and moses malone also came up in that league. the NBA in the 70's was diluted in talent and ravaged by drugs. pretty far cry from the universally regarded all-timers in the 60's (russell, wilt, baylor, oscar, logo, young hondo, etc...).

    he did have a great run though the 80's too, although those were more magic's teams for the most part i think. he was still the go to scorer in the first half of that decade though. and also won three straight titles in college.

    Comment


    • #32
      G__Deane wrote: View Post

      But he wasn't the man on all five, you said yourself he was only the man on the last two (sans Shaq).
      This is when things get understood out of context, look how this convo started:


      You appear to have read it as Kobe wasn't the man on ANY of his championship teams....
      "He was never the man in all 5 of his championships."

      Even with the quote right in his hos that he's replying to that phrase means something different to me than you two. Either way I know what he was saying now.

      Personally if I was building a team I'd take a Shaq in his prime over half the guys in the poll, as well as others like Kobe. Kobe is somewhere in the top 15 though and I'm sure there are people out there who could make a strong case for him being in the top ten somewhere.

      Comment


      • #33
        Apollo wrote: View Post

        "He was never the man in all 5 of his championships."

        Even with the quote right in his hos that he's replying to that phrase means something different to me than you two. Either way I know what he was saying now.

        Personally if I was building a team I'd take a Shaq in his prime over half the guys in the poll, as well as others like Kobe. Kobe is somewhere in the top 15 though and I'm sure there are people out there who could make a strong case for him being in the top ten somewhere.
        Yup, that's why I referenced his prior quote for context. If you didn't remember how the conversation started, you could have misunderstood. Cheers.


        "The Great One wrote:
        Lastly, if you want to be in the GOAT convo, you have to be "the man" in ALL of your championship teams."

        Comment


        • #34
          The more I read about Wilt, the more I think he might be the GOAT.

          I think his game would translate in any era. If you're great you're great. I know we're talking about different sports, but look at Gordie Howe's numbers. He was great in the 40's, great in the 50's, 60's, 70's..... his last season, 1979-1980, as a 51 year old, he put up 41 points in 80 games. That's crazy!

          so I'm changing my vote to Wilt.

          Comment


          • #35
            Wilt was a walking cheat code. His production was unbelievable, the more you look at it the harder it is to believe that actually happened. He was Lebron before Lebron, x10.

            Wilt vs Bill creates the perfect individual production vs rings litmus test. Depends on what you believe in and how much you value the what ifs.

            Personally I lean towards Wilt, Bill Russel played on strong teams. At the same time, don't discount that it's also in a star player's make up to be the kind of guy you can build a stable, winning franchise around. Bill was that guy, Tim Duncan was that guy, Magic and Larry were more like this, some of these other guys bounced around and/or were harder to play with. How much does that count for vs box score stats?
            "We're playing in a building." -- Kawhi Leonard

            Comment


            • #36
              Since we're talking about great athletes, another great example is Gretzky. I'm looking at his DB page right now. His rookie season was in 79-80 where he had 137 points in 79 games. His 3rd to the last season, 96-97 season, he had 97 points in 82 games, the following year he had 90 points in 82 games.

              So he was still putting up big numbers even past his prime, if Gretzky played in the 2000's I'm convinced that he'd put up the same numbers that he did in the 80's.

              Comment


              • #37
                I used Gretzky as an example because I feel like he's the Wilt Chamberlain of the NHL. Look at his numbers, in his prime, he was putting up 200+ points a season lol. He had one season where he scored 92 goals. Just out of this world numbers.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Sonny wrote: View Post
                  I used Gretzky as an example because I feel like he's the Wilt Chamberlain of the NHL. Look at his numbers, in his prime, he was putting up 200+ points a season lol. He had one season where he scored 92 goals. Just out of this world numbers.
                  Well, this is an argument for counting rings instead of comparing individual stats across eras. League wide scoring in both the NBA and the NHL has fluctuated a lot over the years. The NHL in the 80's was averaging up to 4 goals per game. In the 2000's, it's been stuck between 2.5-3 goals per game. That has a huge impact on individual point production.

                  For the NBA, 3 point scoring skews overall point production but the 60's and 70's were the absolute heyday for running up and down the floor and jacking piles of shots. League wide FGA were through the roof during those years. People think the league is all offence and James Harden jacking 3's now? The highest modern era year, 2018-19, is 29th all time for FGA. The NBA didn't used to play any defence and used to take a lot of bad shots - don't let the old heads tell you otherwise. It was the perfect era for Wilt to run all over the place and pile up points, rebounds, and assists. Modern era there would be flat out fewer shots for him to take and fewer rebounds for him to grab. (Pace didn't start getting tracked in the NBA until the 70's, but the top 15 seasons by pace are all in the 70's and 80's. The pace in the NBA the last couple seasons is actually closer to early 90's NBA than it is to 80's NBA. Guys play defence harder than ever and teams have to run more sets in offence & work for good shots, it slows everything down.)

                  So yeah, that's the limitation on taking one guy's individual production and comparing it to players from other decades.
                  "We're playing in a building." -- Kawhi Leonard

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Sonny wrote: View Post
                    Since we're talking about great athletes, another great example is Gretzky. I'm looking at his DB page right now. His rookie season was in 79-80 where he had 137 points in 79 games. His 3rd to the last season, 96-97 season, he had 97 points in 82 games, the following year he had 90 points in 82 games.

                    So he was still putting up big numbers even past his prime, if Gretzky played in the 2000's I'm convinced that he'd put up the same numbers that he did in the 80's.
                    4 X 200 point season including 13 straight seasons of 100+.
                    End of story.
                    * There are 4 seasons in the 2000's where the Art Ross NHL scoring leader didn't even top the 100 point level. Gretz did it 15X on his own....

                    Always hard to compare eras and some of this can be explained by the monster goalie equipment they now wear but Gretzky also didn't get the advantage of the composite stick nowadays that gifts every 98 pound weakling into 98 mph slap shots.

                    There are NBA arguments for maybe half a dozen players to be the best of all time but in the NHL, only an idiot argues that Bobby Orr (number 2 in my books), Howe or Lemieux belongs at the top, great as they were. Maybe if Orr or Lemieux had played 20 seasons but those are different arguments to "who was the best" imo
                    Last edited by G__Deane; Tue May 26, 2020, 12:33 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      The Orr argument is because he was a 2 way player. Gretzky played one way. He wasn't a good defender at all. And a sport like hockey or basketball requires playing defense as much as offense. Even though its more points win.. negating points is also very helpful.

                      I'm not saying Orr was better.. but it's why some people say he is.

                      Personally there is no denying that Gretzky was the GOAT in hockey. I just hated him so much for wrecking any chances the Jets had in getting far in the playoffs. I was so happy when he got traded to LA. And those were fake tears!

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Just like the NBA, there's only one true GOAT in the NHL and that's The Great One. The ? is who's the second greatest player of all time? to me it's Mario Lemieux. He was putting up Gretzky like numbers in his prime and he was doing it in the late 80's/90's. He had one season where he scored 199 points. He finished with 1723 points in 915 career games. Gretzky played 1400+ games. What if Lemieux played as many games as Gretz?
                        Mamba Mentality

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Sonny wrote: View Post
                          I used Gretzky as an example because I feel like he's the Wilt Chamberlain of the NHL. Look at his numbers, in his prime, he was putting up 200+ points a season lol. He had one season where he scored 92 goals. Just out of this world numbers.
                          Scoring was higher in the 80's but the first year he broke 200 he had 65 more points than the next best. Next time he broke 200 he had 79 more points than the next best. Next time he broke 200 he had 73 more points than the next best. Next time he broke 200 he had 74 more points than the next best. Gretzky was 5'11', 165lbs when entering the league as per his rookie card. He's nothing like Wilt in my opinion and there were many, many highly skilled players in the 80's. Gretzky dominated with his mind and finesse.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            S.R. wrote: View Post
                            ...Personally I lean towards Wilt, Bill Russel played on strong teams. At the same time, don't discount that it's also in a star player's make up to be the kind of guy you can build a stable, winning franchise around. Bill was that guy, Tim Duncan was that guy, Magic and Larry were more like this, some of these other guys bounced around and/or were harder to play with. How much does that count for vs box score stats?
                            How you build the team is the prerogative of management. All the "Will to Win" in the world won't change a dysfunctional team to a championship one. Wilt was supremely gifted, and absolutely carried some of his teams on his back. But one player can't do it all, even if he plays 48 minutes a game for over 70 games a year.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              S.R. wrote: View Post
                              ...The NBA didn't used to play any defence and used to take a lot of bad shots - don't let the old heads tell you otherwise. It was the perfect era for Wilt to run all over the place and pile up points, rebounds, and assists...
                              They didn't officially start tracking blocks until the year after Wilt retired, but there is data on the last 112 games he played in. At the age of 35 he averaged 8.8 blocks per game. That's pretty good defence. The NBA didn't start recording steals til the 73/74 season, or Wilt would probably have another record in his pocket.

                              Hard to believe he average 50 points and 26 rebounds one season.

                              https://www.basketballnetwork.net/sh...he-really-was/

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Apollo wrote: View Post

                                Scoring was higher in the 80's but the first year he broke 200 he had 65 more points than the next best. Next time he broke 200 he had 79 more points than the next best. Next time he broke 200 he had 73 more points than the next best. Next time he broke 200 he had 74 more points than the next best. Gretzky was 5'11', 165lbs when entering the league as per his rookie card. He's nothing like Wilt in my opinion and there were many, many highly skilled players in the 80's. Gretzky dominated with his mind and finesse.
                                And Marty McSorley

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X