Top 10 PGs of All-Time

[GP_20]

Top 10 PGs of All-Time,ranked. I have listed my reasons and reasons for not picking all of the players. I have weighted everything from, longetivity, winning, awards, skills, passing, and their overall career status.




Top 10 Point Guards of All-Time




1. http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_X3DT-aRCXRg/Rx_aK88fPSI/AAAAAAAABc4/OGQ638h7Sb0/s400/magic+johnson+6.jpg
Magic Johnson

Advantages: Where do we start for the greatest PG of all-time...1st of all, he was one of the best passers ever. He is easily a top 3 passer of all-time. Important for a PG. Had over 10apg 10 times in his career. And then you go onto seeing he was a great scorer and a terrific rebounder. But thats not where it stops, he has all the awards one would want, including being a 3 time MVP. And to sum it all off, he has 5 championships, including 3 Final MVPs.

Disadvantages: This list is short. Defense was one thing he lacked. Also, his career wasn't as long as one would want from a GOAT.





2. http://www.nba.com/media/bucks/OscarRobertson_200_276.jpg
Oscar Robertson


Advantages: His overall talent and game. The guy is the best scoring PG of all-time. He had great passing numbers. Believe it or not, he won 7 assist titles. Very dominant when it comes to passing and scoring. Many also consider him the greatest rebounder of all-time. He had it all. On top of all this, he was also a good rebounder. He truly could do it all. Has many awards as well, 9 Time All-NBA 1st selection with an MVP. Lastly, he also won a championship.

Disadvantages: Well he didn't do much winning most of his career...Even though he has 1 title, it came as a 2nd option and not a 1st. So he definitely wasn't too much of a winner. Also he dominated the ball quite a bit.





3. http://thesportsunion.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/195_isiah_thomas_pistons.jpg
Isiah Thomas



Advantages: Where do we begin here. He had great passing skills to start off with. He was an amazing scorer, and he 2 championships. So basically he has the major aspects covered. He was overall a 12 Time All-Star, and won a Finals MVP on top of it. Great playoff performer as well.

Disadvantages: He had a very short career. Retired at age 32. Though it began kind of early, and he still accomplished quite a bit. Another thing was he was very TO prone. And defense wasn't his greatest thing either



4. http://www.newsday.com/media/thumbnails/photo/2003-10/9647280.jpg
Bob Cousy



Advantages: The 1st ever True PG. And maybe the greatest ever. He is another Top 3 Passing PG of all-time. The true innovator for passing. Winning an incredible 8 assist titles in a row. He was also one of the best scorers in his era. Being Top 3 in scoring for 3 years. And finish it all off he has more rings than any PG on here. 6 championships. And there is no doubt if the Finals MVP award he existed, he would have at least one. He has also won an MVP.


Disadvantages: It would look like after all he has accomplished he should be at least 3rd. But he played in a less competitive era. And he was behind Russell as the best player on the team for most of his career. Other than that, he is a great PG.





5. http://images.wikia.com/openserving/sports/images/9/93/John_stockton-arton33443-240x290.jpg
John Stockton


Advantages: Probably the most truest PG of them all. And another no doubt Top 3 Passing PG of all-time. Great career longetivity and is the all-time leader in assists and steals. Also had multiple All-Star app. and multiple All-Defensive Team Selections. Been to the playoffs every year of his career.

Disadvantages: Well, he didn't win a ring. Even though he had a Top 15 player of all-time with him. Another problem was he wasn't a "Take over the game" type PG. He never really was a "Superstar", he just did what he did very well. Still a great PG.





6. http://sportsmed.starwave.com/media/nba/2002/0329/photo/a_payton_i.jpg
Gary Payton


Advantages: Another long list of advantages. Great scorer 1st of all. One of the best for a PG at that. He was an exceptionally good passer as well. Finishing over 8apg 6 times. Defense is probably what he will be recognized for the most. Amazing defender for a PG. Won a DPOY. Above average in rebounding also helps. He also won a ring. And had many All-Star app. and All-NBA App. Great longevity and durability on top of that.


Disadvantages: Another short list. The main thing is that he didn't win a ring in his prime. Other than that, there isn't much.




7. http://hoopedia.nba.com/images/3/35/Frazier1.jpg
Walt Frazier


Advantages: Here is another no doubt Top 10 PG of all-time. 1st of all, he was a terrific scorer. Multiple seasons of 20+ppg. Also one of the greatest defensive PGs of all-time. And he was a solid passer and rebounder as well. The guy also won 2 rings.


Disadvantages: 1st of all, his passing wasn't really that good for a PG. Only had more than 7apg twice in his career. That really hurts him. And the 2 rings he won he didn't get a Finals MVP so he was the no.2 guy. Also, his career wasn't that long.




8. http://assets.nydailynews.com/img/2008/01/30/amd_jason_kidd1.jpg
Jason Kidd

Advantages: Well lets get started. He was a great passer/playmaker. One of the best of all-time. He also was a great rebounder. And he played great defense. Multiple All-Star App/Multiple All-NBA Team App. also helps him. There is no doubt he should be up on these Top PG lists. Also has displayed great longevity recently.

Disadvantages: Well he wasn't really one of the greatest scorers. Shot many low FG% years. And he hasn't been able to win a ring either. Other than that, there isn't much for Kidd.




9. http://hoopedia.nba.com/images/8/8f/Pg2_kevin_johnson_195.jpg
Kevin Johnson

Advantages: The most underrated player of all-time. He was a terrific scorer. One of the best PGs in that category. He also was a great passer. One of the best in that category as well. That should lock him in that list already. He also was not too bad of a defender either. Pretty underrated. Also a great playoff performer.

Disadvantages: Well he also didn't win a ring. Also another reason was he was injured a lot, and that cut his career quite a bit. Other than that, he's good to go.




10. http://www.steve-nash.net/images/steve-nash-home.gif
Steve Nash


Advantages: He is a great passer, and a pretty good scorer. He also has won 2 MVPs, and that should be good enough to get you in to this list. Furthermore, great performer in the playoffs, and known to help bring out the best from his teammates.


Disadvantages: Not a good defender. Has never been to the NBA Finals. And also he hasn't played at a high level as long as most of the others.

[IInvented]

Jason Kidd is top 5 PG all time...

[Yung D-Will]

Rewind since when the hell is Bob Cousy better than John Stockton

[Mikaiel]

Funny list :oldlol:

Oscar Robertson :

Disadvantages: Well he didn't do much winning most of his career...Even though he has 1 title, it came as a 2nd option and not a 1st. So he definitely wasn't too much of a winner.


Gary Payton


Advantages: He also won a ring.

:oldlol:

[lakers_forever]

Nate Archibald > Kevin Johnson and Nash.

[AirJordan23]

I'd take Tiny Archibald over Nash. Nash is on the Timbug/Price level for me.

[lakers_forever]

Walt Frazier > Payton.

Both were great defenders, but Frazier won 2 titles as one of the 2 best players of the team.

[GP_20]

Funny list :oldlol:




:oldlol:

Did you say "funny" because of that?

Because winning a ring as a number 2 option isn't that great of a thing for a #2 All-Time great PG, that's why it was listed in his disadvantages. Furthermore, the players in front and behind him won rings as number one options. Advantages and disadvantages section explained why they weren't ranked higher, and that's the reason for Oscar. For Payton, the player above him, and 4 out of the 5 below Payton failed to win a ring. So it makes sense there.


You have to see the whole picture before you decide to think something is funny. Otherwise, the joke is on you.

[juju151111]

LMFAO at you dropping Walt for not being the man. Go look at wilts stats to willis reed during the chip runs. LOL Reed came back and made one shot and Walt made the rest. GTFO if thats why you are dropping him on the list.

[GP_20]

Nate Archibald > Kevin Johnson and Nash.

Nate Archibald is one of the most overrated players of All-Time. Guess how many times he took his team to the playoffs in his prime?



Just once. Yes just once. A player who went to the playoffs just once in his prime deserves to be Top 10 in anything? :oldlol: Well I'm going to be positive and assume you just didn't know that.

Tiny dominated the ball very much, therefore had great statistics, however never really gave his teammates a chance, and therefore missed playoffs.


Nash and KJ on the other hand, granted they were gifted with good teammates, however they also brought out the best out of their teammates, and were able to play a style of play that allowed them to share the ball with their teammates and win games. I think KJ made playoffs every season besides once where he was traded mid-season in his rookie season. This actually matters a lot. What good are Tiny's numbers if they don't even make playoffs? KJ and Nash put up their numbers on a winning team.

[lakers_forever]

Nate Archibald is one of the most overrated players of All-Time. Guess how many times he took his team to the playoffs in his prime?



Just once. Yes just once. A player who went to the playoffs just once in his prime deserves to be Top 10 in anything? :oldlol: Well I'm going to be positive and assume you just didn't know that.

Tiny dominated the ball very much, therefore had great statistics, however never really gave his teammates a chance, and therefore missed playoffs.


Nash and KJ on the other hand, granted they were gifted with good teammates, however they also brought out the best out of their teammates, and were able to play a style of play that allowed them to share the ball with their teammates and win games. I think KJ made playoffs every season besides once where he was traded mid-season in his rookie season. This actually matters a lot. What good are Tiny's numbers if they don't even make playoffs? KJ and Nash put up their numbers on a winning team.

If you value winning so much, How come Payton is ahead of Frazier?

[GP_20]

Walt Frazier > Payton.

Both were great defenders, but Frazier won 2 titles as one of the 2 best players of the team.

Yes both were great defenders. But at the end of the day, the number one duty of a PG is to pass the ball. Frazier averaged more than 7apg only twice in his career, while Payton eclipsed that mark 9 times.

Payton also got stronger arguments for being the better defender. But yeah, pretty close.

Scoring wise, it's pretty close as well.


At the end of the day, 2 rings (0 Finals MVPs) versus, better passing (most important for a PG) and much much greater longevity/durability. You realize Frazier played 15 games after the age of 32? Payton was an All-Star at age 33. I think that speaks volumes. Frazier, just didn't have the longevity of a player like Payton. That and passing make up the "team" arguments Frazier has for himself.

[GP_20]

If you value winning so much, How come Payton is ahead of Frazier?

Major difference between making playoffs and winning the championship. :oldlol:

You realize the differences right? I'm not discounting Tiny because he didn't win a championship. He made the playoffs once in his prime. That's the most pathetic thing. It's a waste of a prime. I mean seriously, think what you are dealing with here. Even players like Iverson, KG (pre-Boston), weren't that bad, and they are criticized for things like that. Bosh I think has either tied or eclipsed Tiny's entire prime accomplishments.

[RocketGreatness]

John Stockton should be 3rd and Kevin Johnson should be ahead of Jason Kidd if you ask me, rest are solid.

[GP_20]

Rewind since when the hell is Bob Cousy better than John Stockton
Cousy was the original passing innovater. He did what Stockton was doing 30 years ago. He won 8 assist titles in a row. Stockton came later, and took off from where Cousy left in passing. Cousy was more innovative when it came to passing, Stockton probably more skilled. I'd still give Stockton the edge due to his records and longevity when it came to passing.

But otherwise, Cousy was probably the better scorer (finished Top 3 in scoring 3 times in his career, we can't even imagine Stockton doing that). Cousy also won 6 championships and an MVP. I don't think Stockton ever finished than 7th in MVP voting and won 0 rings. In the accomplishment section, there are great differences between Stockton and Cousy. It's really not close. That's what separates them.

[GP_20]

John Stockton should be 3rd and Kevin Johnson should be ahead of Jason Kidd if you ask me, rest are solid.

Kevin Johnson in his prime was better than Jason Kidd in his prime, yes. However, due to Kidd's longevity, I gave Kidd the edge over KJ. The same way I gave Stockton the edge over Payton due to his extra longevity.

[GP_20]

Also to add to Tiny Archibald, it's not just that he didn't make playoffs very often in his prime.

Only once in his prime was he on a team that didn't have a losing season.
All the numbers, and whatever you put in during your prime, really don't mean much. Because they were on horrible teams. It's like we are comparing Durant and Granger's statlines with Kobe and Carmelo, and declaring Durant/Granger better. Not only that, it's a widely known fact that Tiny dominated the ball very much, which gave him better stats, but prevented his teammates from contributing. No wonder he missed playoffs.

[Showtime]

My real top 10:

Magic
Oscar
Stockton
Zeke
Clyde
Cousy
Kidd
GP
Goodrich
Tiny

Stockton through Kidd could be interchangeable depending on the criteria, but all those guys could be placed top 5 with solid arguments. Nash doesn't sniff top 10. Nash belongs with guys like Mark Price, Fat Lever, Tim Hardaway, Kevin Johnson, etc. Hell, he won't even be better than Parker, Deron, Paul, etc when it's all said and done.

HM goes to Dennis Johnson.

[Mikaiel]

Did you say "funny" because of that?

Because winning a ring as a number 2 option isn't that great of a thing for a #2 All-Time great PG, that's why it was listed in his disadvantages. Furthermore, the players in front and behind him won rings as number one options. Advantages and disadvantages section explained why they weren't ranked higher, and that's the reason for Oscar. For Payton, the player above him, and 4 out of the 5 below Payton failed to win a ring. So it makes sense there.


You have to see the whole picture before you decide to think something is funny. Otherwise, the joke is on you.

No, that was funny because you said Oscar winning his only ring as a #2 is a bad thing, but then right after that you said one of Payton's advantages was that he had a ring :oldlol:

[Roundball_Rock]

Kidd and Nash are underrated on your list, other than that it is a very good one. Nash does not have as many great seasons as most great players--but the reasons for this are on your list: Kevin Johnson and Jason Kidd. He could not put up great stats when he was on the bench behind two of the greatest PG's ever.

[GP_20]

My real top 10:

Magic
Oscar
Stockton
Zeke
Clyde
Cousy
Kidd
GP
Goodrich
Tiny

Stockton through Cousy could be interchangeable depending on the criteria, but all those guys could be placed top 5 with solid arguments. Nash doesn't sniff top 10. Nash belongs with guys like Mark Price, Fat Lever, Tim Hardaway, Kevin Johnson, etc. Hell, he won't even be better than Parker, Deron, Paul, etc when it's all said and done.

HM goes to Dennis Johnson.

Goodrich? Tiny? You've got to be kidding me.

Correct me if I'm wrong. We were talking about PGs here.

And Gail Goodrich, has passed over 7apg just once in his career. While having only 1 All-NBA selection in his career. Are you serious? :confusedshrug

Awards/Accomplishments


Nash:

3 All-NBA 1st Selections
1 All-NBA 2nd Selection
2 All-NBA 3rd Selections
6 Time All-Star
2 Time MVP
3 Assist Titles



Goodrich:

1 All-NBA 1st Selection
5 Time All-Star
0 Assist Titles


Maybe Nash didn't deserve all his awards, but when the comparison is this one-sided, I'll take the more accomplished player 10/10 times.


But really, are you out of your mind putting a player with only 1 All-NBA selection in his career in Top #10 anything? Do you realize how stupid and ridiculous this sounds? Are you Gail Goodrich? Especially considering that he isn't even a good passer which is needed for these PG lists.

[GP_20]

No, that was funny because you said Oscar winning his only ring as a #2 is a bad thing, but then right after that you said one of Payton's advantages was that he had a ring :oldlol:
Yeah and its all in context like I explained. At the #2 spot, thats a bad thing. But at the #6 spot thats a good thing. Because the players near them either had rings or didn't (In Big O's case, they did, in GP's case they didn't). It's all in context.

If I had Payton at #2 it would be a bad thing, and if I had Big O at #6, it would be a good thing.

[GP_20]

Kidd and Nash are underrated on your list, other than that it is a very good one. Nash does not have as many great seasons as most great players--but the reasons for this are on your list: Kevin Johnson and Jason Kidd. He could not put up great stats when he was on the bench behind two of the greatest PG's ever.

Yeah for 1 season. He spent some more seasons on the bench though.

[GP_20]

Also I love how stupid some posters on ISH are. They rank Tiny in Top 10. Either they don't know he has led his team to a winning record just once in his prime, or either they have some major double standards.

If they rank Tiny in Top 10, taking his statistics and ignoring the fact that he has been on a losing team in his prime all but once, then I better see them rank players like Bosh over KG, Al Jefferson over Duncan, Granger over Carmelo. Yes thats how brilliant ranking Tiny in top 10 is.

[lakers_forever]

Also I love how stupid some posters on ISH are. They rank Tiny in Top 10. Either they don't know he has led his team to a winning record just once in his prime, or either they have some major double standards.

If they rank Tiny in Top 10, taking his statistics and ignoring the fact that he has been on a losing team in his prime all but once, then I better see them rank players like Bosh over KG, Al Jefferson over Duncan, Granger over Carmelo. Yes thats how brilliant ranking Tiny in top 10 is.

If you don't respect other fans opinion, what are you doing in an online forum, making threads with top 10 and all?

[GP_20]

If you don't respect other fans opinion, what are you doing in an online forum, making threads with top 10 and all?
I do respect them. But I don't want anyone to come telling me Al Jefferson is better than Tim Duncan because of his stats. :oldlol:

I think I've shut down the Tiny Top 10 argument. No one has been able to counter it. And it's really just practical. You finish in a losing team every year besides 1? Gary Payton for example, has never in his career finished on a losing team despite having some awful starcasts and playing in a very strong conference. The only other players who can claim that today are O'Neal and Duncan.

[Showtime]

Goodrich? Tiny? You've got to be kidding me.

Correct me if I'm wrong. We were talking about PGs here.

And Gail Goodrich, has passed over 7apg just once in his career. While having only 1 All-NBA selection in his career. Are you serious? :confusedshrug

Awards/Accomplishments


Nash:

3 All-NBA 1st Selections
1 All-NBA 2nd Selection
2 All-NBA 3rd Selections
6 Time All-Star
2 Time MVP
3 Assist Titles



Goodrich:

1 All-NBA 1st Selection
5 Time All-Star
0 Assist Titles


Maybe Nash didn't deserve all his awards, but when the comparison is this one-sided, I'll take the more accomplished player 10/10 times.


But really, are you out of your mind putting a player with only 1 All-NBA selection in his career in Top #10 anything? Do you realize how stupid and ridiculous this sounds? Are you Gail Goodrich? Especially considering that he isn't even a good passer which is needed for these PG lists.

You judge point guard play on assists alone? Walt Frazier's best season was 8 assists, and the rest of his career the closest he got was 6.9. His career average is 6.1. Yet, he's one of the best two-way players in NBA history, and arguably a top 5 PG of all time. I don't judge point guard play on only assists.

And say what you will of Goodrich, but he was a good scorer and passer who won. Hell, in the 72 season, he lead the lakers in scoring (both regular season and playoffs), and played all 82 games and was key in their championship run that year (the same year as their 33 game winning streak). Granted, he was more scorer than facilitator at that point because West handled the ball more. The following season, he did the same thing in leading the team in scoring, and the team made it to the finals where the Knicks beat them. In fact, he lead the team in scoring for several years as West's career wound down and before Kareem came on board. He was no slouch and deserves more respect IMO. Maybe that's why I rank him higher than he should be. Oh, and let's not forget his college play.

And more on that point: does Tony Parker have a lower rank because he was more of a scorer than facilitator? What about Dennis Johnson who didn't stun people with his assist numbers?

Irregardless, both GG, DJ, Hardaway, Johnson, Penny, etc were players that were better or had a better career than Nash.

[GP_20]

You judge point guard play on assists alone? Walt Frazier's best season was 8 assists, and the rest of his career the closest he got was 6.9. His career average is 6.1. Yet, he's one of the best two-way players in NBA history, and arguably a top 5 PG of all time. I don't judge point guard play on only assists.

I don't either. I was just pointing out that he isn't as good of a passer as you would like out of your PG. And I used apg to back myself up. And Goodrich is not a "good" passing PG compared to the greats we are talking about.



And say what you will of Goodrich, but he was a good scorer and passer who won. Hell, in the 72 season, he lead the lakers in scoring (both regular season and playoffs), and played all 82 games and was key in their championship run that year (the same year as their 33 game winning streak). Granted, he was more scorer than facilitator at that point because West handled the ball more. The following season, he did the same thing in leading the team in scoring, and the team made it to the finals where the Knicks beat them. In fact, he lead the team in scoring for several years as West's career wound down and before Kareem came on board. He was no slouch and deserves more respect IMO. Maybe that's why I rank him higher than he should be. Oh, and let's not forget his college play.

I know he was a great scorer, and won a ring as the 3rd best player. Ok?

But at the end of the day Showtime, he made it to 1 All-NBA Team in his whole career. Do you know how pathetic that sounds? All it takes is 2 great seasons and you are there. Goodrich was never able to. This alone should take him out of the discussion. Just think for a second. Please. 1 All-NBA selection. I mean f*uck, are you serious????? I still can't believe I'm hearing this. Even players like Marbury, Glen Rice, and Arenas have made more than 1. It's really not that hard, and if you are Top 10 material, you should have more than 1. (EASILY)




And more on that point: does Tony Parker have a lower rank because he was more of a scorer than facilitator? What about Dennis Johnson who didn't stun people with his assist numbers?

Irregardless, both GG, DJ, Hardaway, Johnson, Penny, etc were players that were better or had a better career than Nash.

Obviously when ranking PGs we are going to weight passing a little more than when ranking players. Parker is hurt by not being as good of a passer, but that alone won't stop him from being a Top 10 PG. Frazier didn't have great passing numbers either, he fell to 7th, but still is Top 10 material.




I'm going to be honest Showtime, I used to have respect for you as a poster. I thought you were rational. But after hearing Goodrich for Top 10 PG, it's gone. Fine, I'm going to give one more benefit of the doubt and think you only put Goodrich there because of his college play. We aren't talking about College here...

[Showtime]

I don't either. I was just pointing out that he isn't as good of a passer as you would like out of your PG. And I used apg to back myself up. And Goodrich is not a "good" passing PG compared to the greats we are talking about.

I don't care. Mark Jackson is arguably a better passer than many more PGs that are considered superior players.


I know he was a great scorer, and won a ring or 2 as the 3rd best player. Ok?

It's more than Nash has EVER been able to accomplish in a watered down west with a top talented (and heavily favored) team in an offensively-friendly league.


But at the end of the day Showtime, he made it to 1 All-NBA Team in his whole career. Do you know how pathetic that sounds? All it takes is 2 great seasons and you are there. Goodrich was never able to. This alone should take him out of the discussion. Just think for a second. Please. 1 All-NBA selection. I mean f*uck, are you serious????? I still can't believe I'm hearing this. Even players like Marbury, Glen Rice, and Arenas have made more than 1. It's really not that hard, and if you are Top 10 material, you should have more than 1. (EASILY)

This is exactly my point. Do those selections (or lackthereof) determine who was the better player or who had the better career? According to you, it does. IMO, it doesn't. So, in your viewpoint, should Marbury be ranked higher than Goodrich? Let's take a look at this:

They started having 3rd teams in '89, and before that, they only had first and second teams. So for arguments sake, let's look at first and second team selections, as those are samples everybody has had.

Marbury has two 3rd team selections. ZERO second or first teams.

Rod Strickland has a 2nd team selection.

Mark Price has four total (one 1st team, three 3rd team).

Do those selections mean that they are better than Goodrich?

Did they have the all time great talent ahead of them on those all-nba teams like Jerry West, Walt Frazier, and Oscar Robertson? Guys like that took up spots, you know. I'm sure if they had a third team, you would have seen his name up there more. You might forget that those are annual awards on the best players, so obviously the level of guard competition effects the choices. I don't know anybody that would rank Price ahead of Goodrich. Is Rod going to the HOF because of that all-nba second teams?


I'm going to be honest Showtime, I used to have respect for you as a poster. I thought you were rational. But after hearing Goodrich for Top 10 PG, it's gone. Fine, I'm going to give one more benefit of the doubt and think you only put Goodrich there because of his college play. We aren't talking about College here...

I already admitted I put him there, probably higher than he should be, based upon the lack of respect he gets. But honestly, he's accomplished more in his career than many other point guards that are considered superior players. I don't base everything on awards, because then I would end up with Marbury or Price ranking higher. Certainly you don't think that logic is respectable.

[GP_20]

I don't care. Mark Jackson is arguably a better passer than many more PGs that are considered superior players.



Once again, I didn't say passing is the only thing that counts. But it is one of the most important here because we are talking about PGs.







This is exactly my point. Do those selections (or lackthereof) determine who was the better player or who had the better career? According to you, it does. IMO, it doesn't. So, in your viewpoint, should Marbury be ranked higher than Goodrich? Let's take a look at this:

They started having 3rd teams in '89, and before that, they only had first and second teams. So for arguments sake, let's look at first and second team selections, as those are samples everybody has had.

Marbury has two 3rd team selections. ZERO second or first teams.

Rod Strickland has a 2nd team selection.

Mark Price has four total (one 1st team, three 3rd team).

Do those selections mean that they are better than Goodrich?

Did they have the all time great talent ahead of them on those all-nba teams like Jerry West, Walt Frazier, and Oscar Robertson? Guys like that took up spots, you know. I'm sure if they had a third team, you would have seen his name up there more. You might forget that those are annual awards on the best players, so obviously the level of guard competition effects the choices. I don't know anybody that would rank Rod Stickland ahead of Goodrich. Is Rod going to the HOF because of those two all-nba second teams?


I wouldn't rank Rod over Goodrich either. 1st of all, Rod only made 1 All-NBA Team just like Goodrich, and it was All-2nd team. So even with the Award logic, Rod ranks behind Goodrich. So I don't know where you got that Rod would be ahead of Goodrich based on awards.

2nd of all, there is tough competition in every era. Some tougher than others thats true.

But it's not 1 All-NBA Selection vs. 2. The difference between Nash and Goodrich's awards is astronomical. The difference between Goodrich and anyone on the list is huge. If it was close, sure you can argue competition, but it's not close.

That's why you just can't have Goodrich in The Top 10 PG list. You just can't have anyone with 1 All-NBA selection on any Top 10 list. :oldlol:



I already admitted I put him there, probably higher than he should be, based upon the lack of respect he gets. But honestly, he's accomplished more in his career than many other point guards that are considered superior players. I don't base everything on awards, because then I would end up with Strickland ranking higher. Certainly you don't think that logic is respectable.

Yeah, well now isn't the time to give him as much respect as he deserves. I agree he is underrated. But he has no business in the Top 10 PG list. And I don't base everything on awards either. But I do place value in awards. And when differences are that great between 2 players, its clear who is better. Unless you had some great excuse such as injuries, or much tougher competition, both which don't seem to be the case here. But yeah, I do place value in awards (and rightfully so), I can't just completely ignore them.

And once again, Stickland isn't over Goodrich even based purely on awards.:oldlol:

[a.k.a baller]

John Stockton should be 3rd and Kevin Johnson should be ahead of Jason Kidd if you ask me, rest are solid.
exactly :rockon:

[Showtime]

Rank them however you want, but I would take probably 15-20 other point guards before I took Nash if I wanted to win. Make of that what you will.

[GP_20]

Rank them however you want, but I would take probably 15-20 other point guards before I took Nash if I wanted to win. Make of that what you will.

I'd probably would respect Nash at #20 more than I would respect Goodrich at #10. :oldlol:

[Niquesports]

Rewind since when the hell is Bob Cousy better than John Stockton
WHen wasnt he.

[Niquesports]

Also to add to Tiny Archibald, it's not just that he didn't make playoffs very often in his prime.

Only once in his prime was he on a team that didn't have a losing season.
All the numbers, and whatever you put in during your prime, really don't mean much. Because they were on horrible teams. It's like we are comparing Durant and Granger's statlines with Kobe and Carmelo, and declaring Durant/Granger better. Not only that, it's a widely known fact that Tiny dominated the ball very much, which gave him better stats, but prevented his teammates from contributing. No wonder he missed playoffs.


How is leading the league in assist preventing your team from contributing. Tiny like iverson really had no choice but to control the ball who was he gonna pass to Sam Lacy? It might not have been his peek but he was a pretty good PG with the Celtics in there run also

[Niquesports]

Also I love how stupid some posters on ISH are. They rank Tiny in Top 10. Either they don't know he has led his team to a winning record just once in his prime, or either they have some major double standards.

If they rank Tiny in Top 10, taking his statistics and ignoring the fact that he has been on a losing team in his prime all but once, then I better see them rank players like Bosh over KG, Al Jefferson over Duncan, Granger over Carmelo. Yes thats how brilliant ranking Tiny in top 10 is.


Has Bosh ever lead the league in scoring
has Jefferson ever lead the league in assist
Has Granger come back in the twilight of his career and lead a team to 2 title?
Not as silly as it seems when you look at the facts

[GP_20]

How is leading the league in assist preventing your team from contributing. Tiny like iverson really had no choice but to control the ball who was he gonna pass to Sam Lacy? It might not have been his peek but he was a pretty good PG with the Celtics in there run also
Well when you have the ball 24/7...Yeah it was kind of like Iverson's situation.

Either way, if you are not making playoffs and finishing on losing teams every year, you can't take your statistics seriously.

Out of his prime he had a good run. But when comparing players, you should obviously compare their prime years.

[GP_20]

Has Bosh ever lead the league in scoring
has Jefferson ever lead the league in assist
Has Granger come back in the twilight of his career and lead a team to 2 title?
Not as silly as it seems when you look at the facts
And who are you comparing Bosh to? A falling down KG? We are comparing Tiny to All-Time great PGs.

So it's not important for Bosh to have Tiny's accomplishments, just like its not important for KG to play at a level of an All-Time great PG.

But the comparison is valid if you get the point. Just like we discount the statistics of Bosh, Granger, and Jefferson when compared to players on winning teams, Tiny should receive the same treatment.

And it's not like Tiny led the league in scoring and passing every year. I'm looking at his prime as a whole. Only once did he not finish in a losing team. So no need to point out single seasons.

[Niquesports]

Yes both were great defenders. But at the end of the day, the number one duty of a PG is to pass the ball. Frazier averaged more than 7apg only twice in his career, while Payton eclipsed that mark 9 times.

Payton also got stronger arguments for being the better defender. But yeah, pretty close.

Scoring wise, it's pretty close as well.


At the end of the day, 2 rings (0 Finals MVPs) versus, better passing (most important for a PG) and much much greater longevity/durability. You realize Frazier played 15 games after the age of 32? Payton was an All-Star at age 33. I think that speaks volumes. Frazier, just didn't have the longevity of a player like Payton. That and passing make up the "team" arguments Frazier has for himself.
IF you want to base it on longevity I woujld argue but if you want to base it on Peek I have to go with Frazier
IF you want to discuss Fraziers apg. You cant compare the two. Frazier shared PG duties with Monroe and the Knicks as a whole were one of the best passing teams ever so its not like with Payton when all the set up plays were designed for him.
At the end of the day in the big games Frazier out performs payton

[GP_20]

IF you want to base it on longevity I woujld argue but if you want to base it on Peek I have to go with Frazier
IF you want to discuss Fraziers apg. You cant compare the two. Frazier shared PG duties with Monroe and the Knicks as a whole were one of the best passing teams ever so its not like with Payton when all the set up plays were designed for him.
At the end of the day in the big games Frazier out performs payton

Payton also had to share duties at PG with Nate McMillan. Detlef also was a great passer. Monroe never averaged more than 4apg while playing with Frazier in Walt's prime. I know he had other teammates too, but I was just pointing out that Payton too had to share PG duties.

[Niquesports]

Well when you have the ball 24/7...Yeah it was kind of like Iverson's situation.

Either way, if you are not making playoffs and finishing on losing teams every year, you can't take your statistics seriously.

Out of his prime he had a good run. But when comparing players, you should obviously compare their prime years.

To say its Tiny's fault that the Kings didnt make the playoffs is just silly he had no support cast you just cant compare the teams KJ and Nash played with to the team Tiny played with

Well Oscar didnt win his title in his prime years also TIny made a bigger impact coming into the league than KJ and Nash does that count

[Niquesports]

And who are you comparing Bosh to? A falling down KG? We are comparing Tiny to All-Time great PGs.

So it's not important for Bosh to have Tiny's accomplishments, just like its not important for KG to play at a level of an All-Time great PG.

But the comparison is valid if you get the point. Just like we discount the statistics of Bosh, Granger, and Jefferson when compared to players on winning teams, Tiny should receive the same treatment.

And it's not like Tiny led the league in scoring and passing every year. I'm looking at his prime as a whole. Only once did he not finish in a losing team. So no need to point out single seasons.

Compare Tiny's peek season to KJ's and Nash neither can match Tiny.
ALso are you ranking the PG based on career or prime. IF Prime TIny again out perfroms the others
Ok Nash miss the playoffs this year Rondo makes it is he better than Nash?
Rafel Austin makes the playoffs Devin Harris doesnt ?
you cant just say this player didnt make the playoffs he must not have made a impact without taking into considerstion that players supporting cast.

[GP_20]

Compare Tiny's peek season to KJ's and Nash neither can match Tiny.
ALso are you ranking the PG based on career or prime. IF Prime TIny again out perfroms the others
Ok Nash miss the playoffs this year Rondo makes it is he better than Nash?
Rafel Austin makes the playoffs Devin Harris doesnt ?
you cant just say this player didnt make the playoffs he must not have made a impact without taking into considerstion that players supporting cast.

I'm comparing their careers. Which primarily weighs how they did in their primes.
And I'm not talking about "this year" or "a year".


Tiny Archibald finished on a losing year every year besides once in his prime.

Nash has obviously been to the playoffs most years, and Harris and Alston aren't comparable players. Harris has much better statistics, is an All-Star caliber player, etc. Alston is a role player. Come on, don't use the Horry argument.


Tiny Archibald's 34/11 came in a season where they finished 36-46 and missed playoffs. Seriously, what is the point of your great season if you miss playoffs? Does it matter at all?



But yeah it's not 1 season, it's his whole prime. In which he was also traded 3 times. I wonder why? He had 3 different situations, but the same result. It's Tiny that should be blamed.

[daily]

John Stockton should be 3rd and Kevin Johnson should be ahead of Jason Kidd if you ask me, rest are solid.

Stockton couldn't dictate the game, he played great within the framework of the system but he was not a great freelance make it up as you go along level player. Take away Malone, take away the pick and roll and he's a lesser PG. He's a top 10 but not a top 3 by any stretch.

[GP_20]

Stockton couldn't dictate the game, he played great within the framework of the system but he was not a great freelance make it up as you go along level player. Take away Malone, take away the pick and roll and he's a lesser PG. He's a top 10 but not a top 3 by any stretch.

Exactly

[Niquesports]

I'm comparing their careers. Which primarily weighs how they did in their primes.
And I'm not talking about "this year" or "a year".


Tiny Archibald finished on a losing year every year besides once in his prime.

Nash has obviously been to the playoffs most years, and Harris and Alston aren't comparable players. Harris has much better statistics, is an All-Star caliber player, etc. Alston is a role player. Come on, don't use the Horry argument.

THis is my point Harris has an All Star caliber year but his "TEAM" misses the playoffs does that diminish his accomplishment as a player and lower his status below that of an player that makes the playoffs which is what your sayingTiny Archibald's 34/11 came in a season where they finished 36-46 and missed playoffs. Seriously, what is the point of your great season if you miss playoffs? Does it matter at all?

THis isnt bowling his TEAM missed the playoffs I dont think even Jordan coujld have lead that team to a playoffs
But yeah it's not 1 season, it's his whole prime. In which he was also traded 3 times. I wonder why? He had 3 different situations, but the same result. It's Tiny that should be blamed.
Well when he was traded to the NEts he was injured for most of his stay so even hurt its his fault his team doesnt make the playoffs. Second his stint with Boston he was still a top PG and was very vital in Boston winning.He wasnt some old vet backup ie:Sam Cassell Boston and Gary Payton Heat

[GP_20]

Well when he was traded to the NEts he was injured for most of his stay so even hurt its his fault his team doesnt make the playoffs. Second his stint with Boston he was still a top PG and was very vital in Boston winning.He wasnt some old vet backup ie:Sam Cassell Boston and Gary Payton Heat

1. Yeah but in your example you were comparing All-Star Harris to role-player Alston.

Here we are comparing Tiny to Nash/KJ. Nash and KJ are not role players. That's why your comparison was invalid.

2. And all I'm saying is that you can't really use Tiny's stats as why he is a better player. He put them in non-playoff teams while totally dominating the ball. It's the same reason no one thinks Granger >>> Carmello because he has better stats.

Granted he had bad teammates. But on when you've played for 3 different teams, and your team still sucks, you have to look at yourself. Plus he had some solid players, Jimmy Walker for one. Also, there's something called playing a team game, which Tiny didn't even bother with. Maybe if he had tried that...



You tell me other All-Time greats (Top 10 in their position) that are considered Top 10 but have made playoffs once in their primes. Or that have been on losing teams all their prime but once. Tell me. You'll have trouble finding any players. Because players with great stats on losing teams all their primes is nothing special.

[Niquesports]

1. Yeah but in your example you were comparing All-Star Harris to role-player Alston.

Here we are comparing Tiny to Nash/KJ. Nash and KJ are not role players. That's why your comparison was invalid.

2. And all I'm saying is that you can't really use Tiny's stats as why he is a better player. He put them in non-playoff teams while totally dominating the ball. It's the same reason no one thinks Granger >>> Carmello because he has better stats.
Comparing Granger to Mello is no different than comparing Austin to Harris
Granted he had bad teammates. But on when you've played for 3 different teams, and your team still sucks, you have to look at yourself. Plus he had some solid players, Jimmy Walker for one. Also, there's something called playing a team game, which Tiny didn't even bother with. Maybe if he had tried that...
Well two of those team he was hurt almost 50% of the time how can you blame him for his team losing? Jimmy Walker are you talking his college career or his pro?

You tell me other All-Time greats (Top 10 in their position) that are considered Top 10 but have made playoffs once in their primes. Or that have been on losing teams all their prime but once. Tell me. You'll have trouble finding any players. Because players with great stats on losing teams all their primes is nothing special.

You keep saying he wasnt a team player and didnt get his team involved well how did he lead the league in assist?
Would you call a players prime if they helped turn a last place team into a playoff team while having his second highest assist total and named an All Star?
The next year he is the All Star game MVp and finish 5th in assist as the floor leader for a Championship team
The next year finish 4th in assist

Thats Tiny's prime you cant call a players rookie year his prime
or his second year
TIny 3rd year he steps up makes All Satr game
4th year he's hurt only plays 35 gm
5th year which most would agree looking at his career is his prime
6th year Kings have no support for Tiny
Then he is traded and hurt until 79-80 with Boston which he did more with as far as playing acoomplishments than he did with the Kings/Braves/Nets so yes his Prime is better than Nash/KJ

[D.J.]

1)Magic Johnson
2)Oscar Robertson
3)Bob Cousy
4)Isiah Thomas
5)John Stockton
6)Gary Payton
7)Tiny Archibald
8)Kevin Johnson
9)Jason Kidd
10)Tim Hardaway


For the record, Steve Nash should not be on anyone's top 10 list.

[GP_20]

You keep saying he wasnt a team player and didnt get his team involved well how did he lead the league in assist?
Would you call a players prime if they helped turn a last place team into a playoff team while having his second highest assist total and named an All Star?
The next year he is the All Star game MVp and finish 5th in assist as the floor leader for a Championship team
The next year finish 4th in assist

Thats Tiny's prime you cant call a players rookie year his prime
or his second year
TIny 3rd year he steps up makes All Satr game
4th year he's hurt only plays 35 gm
5th year which most would agree looking at his career is his prime
6th year Kings have no support for Tiny
Then he is traded and hurt until 79-80 with Boston which he did more with as far as playing acoomplishments than he did with the Kings/Braves/Nets so yes his Prime is better than Nash/KJ

In his 1st year with Boston, the Celtic's record got worse. Only when Larry Bird came they became good. Any doubts? No. Please don't try feeding me that BS on how Tiny made the Celtics better. That was most Larry Legend.

So you were saying that his years in Boston were his prime? :oldlol:

Well he was dropping 14/8. That's his prime? Okay if you say so. So that's how his stats look on a "good team". By good I mean 50-60 win teams. Like Nash and KJ have been all their careers.

Well since KJ/Nash never have been in pathetic teams like Tiny, let's compare their numbers when both were in 50+ win teams. Tiny was 14/8. Nash was 18/11, and KJ 22/11.

So if that was Tiny's prime, then KJ/Nash are still better than him. Easily.





So really there is no way you are going to win this argument. You either don't call the Boston years his prime, therefore you can't use them when comparing primes. OR you call them his prime, and get totally humiliated when comparing those prime numbers to KJ/Nash.



Also doesn't being "hurt" have anything to do with how high a player should be ranked? I would NEVER want a player that plays 30 games for me every other year in his prime. Never. That is another reason to put KJ/Nash over him.

[Niquesports]

1)Magic Johnson
2)Oscar Robertson
3)Bob Cousy
4)Isiah Thomas
5)John Stockton
6)Gary Payton
7)Tiny Archibald
8)Kevin Johnson
9)Jason Kidd
10)Tim Hardaway


For the record, Steve Nash should not be on anyone's top 10 list.
Cant see Hardaway over Frazier or Dennis Johnson Like it or not Nash 2 MVp's gets him in top 10 even if its #10

[GP_20]

1)Magic Johnson
2)Oscar Robertson
3)Bob Cousy
4)Isiah Thomas
5)John Stockton
6)Gary Payton
7)Tiny Archibald
8)Kevin Johnson
9)Jason Kidd
10)Tim Hardaway


For the record, Steve Nash should not be on anyone's top 10 list.

Everytime I see Tiny on a Top 10 list, I know that person does not know what they are talking about.


You guys are practically saying Granger is better than Melo. Only advantage Tiny has over some of these PGs is stats. Otherwise, he wasn't on a losing team once in his prime. Yes he was an All-Star. So was Granger. So was Melo. Difference? Granger better stats than Melo, but on a losing team. So now if you think Granger >>> Melo, then I could see why you think Tiny >>> KJ. But wow....

[Showtime]

Everytime I see Tiny on a Top 10 list, I know that person does not know what they are talking about.


You guys are practically saying Granger is better than Melo. Only advantage Tiny has over some of these PGs is stats. Otherwise, he wasn't on a losing team once in his prime. Yes he was an All-Star. So was Granger. So was Melo. Difference? Granger better stats than Melo, but on a losing team. So now if you think Granger >>> Melo, then I could see why you think Tiny >>> KJ. But wow....
Michael Jordan didn't have a winning season until his 4th year (well, 3rd since his injury took him out for most of his second season). So does that mean that those years don't count? Does it mean he wasn't a great player? His '87 campaign doesn't matter because the Bulls weren't a .500 club?

[D.J.]

Cant see Hardaway over Frazier or Dennis Johnson Like it or not Nash 2 MVp's gets him in top 10 even if its #10


Hardaway and Frazier are interchangable at number nine and number ten in my opinion. Most people forget how good Tim Hardaway really was. He was 6'0" at best, but was a good scorer, good playmaker(averaged a double-double twice), tough defender, and a pretty good rebounder for his size. Hardaway's lack of notorioty is mainly because Golden State was not a great team. It was not until he arrived in Miami where he saw at least some playoff success, though he was past his prime at that point.

As for Steve Nash, he does have two MVP's which will get him to the Hall of Fame. But, when you look at the other names on the list, he has absolutely nothing on them.

[D.J.]

Everytime I see Tiny on a Top 10 list, I know that person does not know what they are talking about.


You guys are practically saying Granger is better than Melo. Only advantage Tiny has over some of these PGs is stats. Otherwise, he wasn't on a losing team once in his prime. Yes he was an All-Star. So was Granger. So was Melo. Difference? Granger better stats than Melo, but on a losing team. So now if you think Granger >>> Melo, then I could see why you think Tiny >>> KJ. But wow....


It is not his fault his teams were not that good. Dominique Wilkins' Hawks were not a great team. Sure he made the playoffs, but he never reached the Conference Finals. Charls Barkley's 76ers had only minimal success before he went to Phoenix. Nine seasons into David Robinson's career, the Spurs reached the Conference Finals only once.

A lack of team success has no bearing on an individual's talent. Some players are blessed to be on great teams and others are stuck on mediocre teams. One player cannot win a title for a mediocre team. It is impossible. Even the great Michael Jordan needed Scottie Pippen.

[GP_20]

Michael Jordan didn't have a winning season until his 4th year (well, 3rd since his injury took him out for most of his second season). So does that mean that those years don't count? Does it mean he wasn't a great player? His '87 campaign doesn't matter because the Bulls weren't a .500 club?
Those years still count. First of all they still made playoffs. Jordan proved himself later on, quite easily. Tiny however, all his prime he was a failure. Just a total failure. :oldlol: This isn't like Iverson or KG (who are criticized for things like this) where they missed the playoffs 2-3 times, or 2-3 years in a row, this is where you only make playoffs once in your whole prime. Where did you spend your prime in, watching the playoffs from your TV? What kind of career is that?

Archibald had 3 different teams, and he failed with all 3 of them. Like I said, you are comparing Granger to Melo here. Both All-Stars, one has better numbers, but on a bad team. And thats pretty much Tiny's prime. Though I would say KJ had better numbers too and did it on winning teams.

[Niquesports]

In his 1st year with Boston, the Celtic's record got worse. Only when Larry Bird came they became good. Any doubts? No. Please don't try feeding me that BS on how Tiny made the Celtics better. That was most Larry Legend.
In his first year with Boston the whole team was in dissary not just TinyLarry Legend as you want to call him had lots of help new coach secured PG the list goes onSo you were saying that his years in Boston were his prime? :oldlol:

Well he was dropping 14/8. That's his prime? Okay if you say so. So that's how his stats look on a "good team". By good I mean 50-60 win teams. Like Nash and KJ have been all their careers.

Nash/KJ both began there careers as Backups unlike Tiny

Well since KJ/Nash never have been in pathetic teams like Tiny, let's compare their numbers when both were in 50+ win teams. Tiny was 14/8. Nash was 18/11, and KJ 22/11.

So if that was Tiny's prime, then KJ/Nash are still better than him. Easily.

and how many rings did Nash or KJ get ?????


So really there is no way you are going to win this argument. You either don't call the Boston years his prime, therefore you can't use them when comparing primes. OR you call them his prime, and get totally humiliated when comparing those prime numbers to KJ/Nash.



Also doesn't being "hurt" have anything to do with how high a player should be ranked? I would NEVER want a player that plays 30 games for me every other year in his prime. Never. That is another reason to put KJ/Nash over him.

I would not call Boston his prime I woulod call it what he is able to do on a quality team.How does he get humliated when he was the PG vital player on a title team and neither Nash or KJ could do this.Bottom line if you take TIny best 3 years and Nash and KJ's best 3 its Nash and KJ that gets humiliated.

Sure a player that has had many injuries would hurt his ranking but if I was ranking 2 players
1 has a title as a vital player and also is a HOF'er
and the other has no title and isnt in the HOF I take player 1
also look at there career stats Tiny again wins

[GP_20]

It is not his fault his teams were not that good. Dominique Wilkins' Hawks were not a great team. Sure he made the playoffs, but he never reached the Conference Finals. Charls Barkley's 76ers had only minimal success before he went to Phoenix. Nine seasons into David Robinson's career, the Spurs reached the Conference Finals only once.

A lack of team success has no bearing on an individual's talent. Some players are blessed to be on great teams and others are stuck on mediocre teams. One player cannot win a title for a mediocre team. It is impossible. Even the great Michael Jordan needed Scottie Pippen.

It's not about reaching somewhere in the playoffs or winning the championship. It's simply MAKING the playoffs. All the All-Time greats have been able to do that.

If you don't think so, name me another All-Time great (Arguably Top 10 in his position) who made playoffs only once in his prime. Good luck, you will have wasted your time.


It's just about making playoffs. All the players you mentioned still made them. Just name me 1 legend who could not even take his team to the playoffs in his prime.

[Niquesports]

Everytime I see Tiny on a Top 10 list, I know that person does not know what they are talking about.


You guys are practically saying Granger is better than Melo. Only advantage Tiny has over some of these PGs is stats. Otherwise, he wasn't on a losing team once in his prime. Yes he was an All-Star. So was Granger. So was Melo. Difference? Granger better stats than Melo, but on a losing team. So now if you think Granger >>> Melo, then I could see why you think Tiny >>> KJ. But wow....


Well some of the people that dont know what there talking about are HOF voters guess thats why you dont get a vote

[D.J.]

It's not about reaching somewhere in the playoffs or winning the championship. It's simply MAKING the playoffs. All the All-Time greats have been able to do that.

If you don't think so, name me another All-Time great (Arguably Top 10 in his position) who made playoffs only once in his prime. Good luck, you will have wasted your time.


It's just about making playoffs. All the players you mentioned still made them. Just name me 1 legend who could not even take his team to the playoffs in his prime.


You could make a similar case with Tracy McGrady. He has never been out of the first round, but does that take away from his individual talent?

[Niquesports]

Those years still count. First of all they still made playoffs. Jordan proved himself later on, quite easily. Tiny however, all his prime he was a failure. Just a total failure. :oldlol: This isn't like Iverson or KG (who are criticized for things like this) where they missed the playoffs 2-3 times, or 2-3 years in a row, this is where you only make playoffs once in your whole prime. Where did you spend your prime in, watching the playoffs from your TV? What kind of career is that?

Archibald had 3 different teams, and he failed with all 3 of them. Like I said, you are comparing Granger to Melo here. Both All-Stars, one has better numbers, but on a bad team. And thats pretty much Tiny's prime. Though I would say KJ had better numbers too and did it on winning teams.
LEt me give you a reason why your logic makes no logic.
Kevin Durant has been on a losing team his first 2 years but there is no second year player any GM would take over him not one on the Lakers,Magic,Cavs,Spurs,Nuggetts ect.. all better teams than himmost would take Durrant over every top 4 team in this years playoff but Kobe,LBJ Howard and Mello

[GP_20]

You could make a similar case with Tracy McGrady. He has never been out of the first round, but does that take away from his individual talent?
Wow. I can't believe this. Do you know how to read?


Did T-Mac make playoffs? YES


I'm not talking about going anywhere in the playoffs, I'm just saying making them. I said that in my last post too. And then you bring up T-Mac going past the 1st round. Really? I mean, even my dog can understand things better than this.



Once again, name me another legend who made playoffs just once in his prime. I'm waiting.

[GP_20]

LEt me give you a reason why your logic makes no logic.
Kevin Durant has been on a losing team his first 2 years but there is no second year player any GM would take over him not one on the Lakers,Magic,Cavs,Spurs,Nuggetts ect.. all better teams than himmost would take Durrant over every top 4 team in this years playoff but Kobe,LBJ Howard and Mello
What does taking Durant right now have to do with ANYTHING?

I wasn't even tlaking about Durant 1st of all:oldlol:


It's between Granger and Melo. Both All-Stars. Granger better stats but on non-playoff team. Melo worse stats, but on a playoff team. Who do you got? That is the question. Tiny or KJ? It's not about who you take right now for future, its about who is better right now

[GP_20]

I would not call Boston his prime I woulod call it what he is able to do on a quality team.How does he get humliated when he was the PG vital player on a title team and neither Nash or KJ could do this.Bottom line if you take TIny best 3 years and Nash and KJ's best 3 its Nash and KJ that gets humiliated.

Sure a player that has had many injuries would hurt his ranking but if I was ranking 2 players
1 has a title as a vital player and also is a HOF'er
and the other has no title and isnt in the HOF I take player 1
also look at there career stats Tiny again wins

Ok so Boston was not his prime.

Let's compare their primes then please.


Here let me show you something:


Tiny Archibald
1972-1977 (Prime)

385 games

26.7ppg
8.9apg
2.7rpg
46.9% FG
Average wins per year 32-33


Kevin Johnson
1989-1992

310 games

21.2ppg
11.1apg
3.8rpg
50.0% FG
Average wins per year 54-55


There are your statistics for your godly Tiny Archibald. All he really does better than KJ is shoot more. KJ as a PG, has more assists, and can score more efficiently. Furthermore, Tiny does it for a team that wins 33 as opposed to 55 wins for KJ.




Now choose who you got.

The 21/11/50% player on a 55 win team.
Or the 27/9/47% player on a 33 win team.





End of Tiny vs. KJ comparison.

[GP_20]

Also just for individual comparisons, KJ was very similar to Tiny. But he was quicker, a better shooter, and a much better passer/playmaker.

[Sir Charles]

Big O is a Combo Guard...not exactly a PG

[raptorfan_dr07]

My real top 10:

Magic
Oscar
Stockton
Zeke
Clyde
Cousy
Kidd
GP
Goodrich
Tiny

Stockton through Kidd could be interchangeable depending on the criteria, but all those guys could be placed top 5 with solid arguments. Nash doesn't sniff top 10. Nash belongs with guys like Mark Price, Fat Lever, Tim Hardaway, Kevin Johnson, etc. Hell, he won't even be better than Parker, Deron, Paul, etc when it's all said and done.

HM goes to Dennis Johnson.

I'm going with this list. :applause: I would probably make the cut off at Bob Cousy up to Stock as being interchangeable. I agree with your HM, DJ is most definitely slept on.

[bizil]

Here's my list with things like accomplishments, longevity, stats, and talent all involved:

1. Magic
2. Big O
3. Zeke
4. Stockton
5. Frazier
6. Cousy
7. Kidd
8. Payton
9. Tiny
10. Nash

[GP_20]

Tiny Archibald has become one of the most overrated players in NBA history. Sad to see. And people just li.st him as Top 10 without really arguing why

[jason816]

any list with John Stockton not a top 2 is a joke.

edit: Bob Cousy shouldn't even be in the top 10, the man doesn't even dribble with his left hand.

[D.J.]

any list with John Stockton not a top 2 is a joke.


They're interchangable, but the one thing Isiah has over Stockton is he went all out in the playoffs.

[GP_20]

They're interchangable, but the one thing Isiah has over Stockton is he went all out in the playoffs.
I'm telling you, you really need to work on your reading comprehension. That idiot you are quoting is implying Stockton is "Top 2". In other words over Magic and Oscar Robertson. Isiah Thomas has nothing to do with this.



Seriously, I want to see someone counter the Tiny or Goodrich or any of those arguments. Not post more stupid comments.

[D.J.]

I'm telling you, you really need to work on your reading comprehension. That idiot you are quoting is implying Stockton is "Top 2". In other words over Magic and Oscar Robertson. Isiah Thomas has nothing to do with this.



Seriously, I want to see someone counter the Tiny or Goodrich or any of those arguments. Not post more stupid comments.


If Stockton is top two, then he is above Isiah as well. My comprehension is fine, thanks for asking.

[GP_20]

If Stockton is top two, then he is above Isiah as well. My comprehension is fine, thanks for asking.
Isiah was 4th on your list. Oscar Robertson was 2nd on your list. So if you were sharp or understood everything correctly, who would you argue over Stockton 1st? Oscar or Isiah? Common sense says Oscar. This isn't rocket scientist here.


If my Top 2 SGs ever are Jordan and Kobe. And someone says AI is the GOAT SG, I'm not going to give them reasons why Kobe >>> AI. I am going to give them reasons why MJ >>> AI. For 2 reasons. One it's easier to argue MJ over AI then Kobe over AI. And number 2, he is talking about GOAT SG, so I'm going to argue with the actual GOAT SG.

Does this make sense now? When someone is saying Stockton is the 2nd best PG. You should argue with who your 2nd best PG is. It's easier, and thats what you believe.

[momo]

Yes both were great defenders. But at the end of the day, the number one duty of a PG is to pass the ball. Frazier averaged more than 7apg only twice in his career, while Payton eclipsed that mark 9 times.



Walt ran his squad beautifully and it was a great passing team. Lot of guys on that squad eat into his potential assist total because the whole starting unit passed well and shot well. If Clyde needed to get a guy an open shot, he was money at it. On a drive and kick team where he is the main driver, his assist total would have been higher.

I think Clyde was a WAY better leader than GP. GP's best chance to win a ring as a real contributor came on the lakers and he did not lead, he wanked about his shots and became a distraction.

[Niquesports]

Ok so Boston was not his prime.

Let's compare their primes then please.


Here let me show you something:


Tiny Archibald
1972-1977 (Prime)

385 games

26.7ppg
8.9apg
2.7rpg
46.9% FG
Average wins per year 32-33


Kevin Johnson
1989-1992

310 games

21.2ppg
11.1apg
3.8rpg
50.0% FG
Average wins per year 54-55


There are your statistics for your godly Tiny Archibald. All he really does better than KJ is shoot more. KJ as a PG, has more assists, and can score more efficiently. Furthermore, Tiny does it for a team that wins 33 as opposed to 55 wins for KJ.




Now choose who you got.

The 21/11/50% player on a 55 win team.
Or the 27/9/47% player on a 33 win team.





End of Tiny vs. KJ comparison.

Give me the guy that helped his team win a Title
Give me the guy that is in the HOF
Give me the guy that was able to lead the league in scoring
Give me the guy that was rated a TOp 50 of All Time
GIve me the Guy with an ALL Star Game MVP
Whats KJ's resume look like compared to this?

End of comparison

[Niquesports]

Wow. I can't believe this. Do you know how to read?


Did T-Mac make playoffs? YES


I'm not talking about going anywhere in the playoffs, I'm just saying making them. I said that in my last post too. And then you bring up T-Mac going past the 1st round. Really? I mean, even my dog can understand things better than this.



Once again, name me another legend who made playoffs just once in his prime. I'm waiting.


WIth you saying this Im sure or at leasat hope that you are unaware that in the early 70's only 4 teams made the playoffs.Unlike today and in KJ time when all but 8 teams in the division make the playoffs.
ALso with that in mind how many legends had the support cast of such house hold names as

Tom Van Arsdale
Sam Lacy
Dick Gibbs
Ken Durrett
Johhny Green
Don Kojis
John Mengett
wow you have a point why wasnt Tiny able to lead this group into the playoffs as at least a top 4 team in the division Im Sure KJ could have

[cotdt]

Big O is a Combo Guard...not exactly a PG

Definitely NOT a traditional PG and should not be on this list.

[plowking]

Tim Hardaway>Kevin Johnson
Tim Hardaway>Steve Nash
Gary Payton>John Stockton
Isiah Thomas>Oscar Robertson

Good list though.

[Niquesports]

What does taking Durant right now have to do with ANYTHING?

I wasn't even tlaking about Durant 1st of all:oldlol:


It's between Granger and Melo. Both All-Stars. Granger better stats but on non-playoff team. Melo worse stats, but on a playoff team. Who do you got? That is the question. Tiny or KJ? It's not about who you take right now for future, its about who is better right now

To compare Mello a top 10 player in the league to a boarderline All Star in Granger is silly almost as silly as Comparing Tiny a 3 time First Team All NBA HOF'er to KJ how many times was he a first team ALL NBA oops never and only made 3 all star teams Tiny is in the Isiah Stock level KJ is with the Mark Jacksons Tim Hardaway level.

[Niquesports]

Also just for individual comparisons, KJ was very similar to Tiny. But he was quicker, a better shooter, and a much better passer/playmaker.


Not sure if you ever saw Tiny to say KJ was quicker maybe youir just assuming Steve Kerr was a better shooter than Tiny also but was not the scorer that Tiny was neither was KJ Tiny's passing and playmaking lead a team to a title what did KJ's do ?

LEt me tell you

No First Team ALL NBA
NO Title
No TOp 50 of all time
NO HOF

[Shep]

1. magic johnson
2. bob cousy
3. john stockton
4. gary payton
5. jason kidd
6. isiah thomas
7. lenny wilkins
8. tim hardaway
9. guy rodgers
10. steve nash

[GP_20]

Give me the guy that helped his team win a Title
Give me the guy that is in the HOF
Give me the guy that was able to lead the league in scoring
Give me the guy that was rated a TOp 50 of All Time
GIve me the Guy with an ALL Star Game MVP
Whats KJ's resume look like compared to this?

End of comparison

"He was in the HOF" (KJ isn't out for good either)
"He won All-Star MVP"
"He was rated Top 50 All-Time" (KJ's career wasn't finished then)

:roll:

These are the arguments you have left. God damn that is pathetic. Obviously we know who is done here. If all you have left are things like All-Star MVPs or HOFs, against a player who hasn't gotten a chance to become a HOF or wasn't done when Top 50 was selected....then I'm sorry, you are DONE



WIth you saying this Im sure or at leasat hope that you are unaware that in the early 70's only 4 teams made the playoffs.Unlike today and in KJ time when all but 8 teams in the division make the playoffs.


I also said, Tiny has finished on a losing team all his prime besides just one year. Therefore, I don't give a f*uck how many make playoffs. It's irrelevant for that argument.



To compare Mello a top 10 player in the league to a boarderline All Star in Granger is silly almost as silly as Comparing Tiny a 3 time First Team All NBA HOF'er to KJ how many times was he a first team ALL NBA oops never and only made 3 all star teams Tiny is in the Isiah Stock level KJ is with the Mark Jacksons Tim Hardaway level.

Yeah, comparing Granger to Melo is like comparing Tiny to KJ. Tiny is Granger, KJ is Melo.

Hello? Are you f*ucking retarded?

Granger/Tiny:

All-Star
Arguably Better Statistics on Poor Teams

Melo/KJ:

All-Star
Arguably better statistics on Good Teams



Are you lacking common sense here? And I'm giving you some lead way here too. Because Melo had for sure worse stats than Granger, while KJ and Tiny are arguable, with advantage going to KJ. So KJ >>> Tiny more than Melo >>> Granger. That's the only difference here. Though I guess Tiny's out of prime makes up some of that, so its just like comparing Melo to Granger.





Not sure if you ever saw Tiny to say KJ was quicker maybe youir just assuming Steve Kerr was a better shooter than Tiny also but was not the scorer that Tiny was neither was KJ Tiny's passing and playmaking lead a team to a title what did KJ's do ?

LEt me tell you

No First Team ALL NBA
NO Title
No TOp 50 of all time
NO HOF




:roll:

So seems like your main arguments are arguments where Tiny was out of his prime. Didn't know when comparing players we should weigh their out of prime years more than their prime years. :oldlol:

By the way, KJ's peak came around the same time as Magic and Jordan's peak. The 2 best guards in the history of the game. Do you think even Tiny can make All-NBA 1st over them dumbass? Kevin Johnson was better than a peak John Stockton for comparison's sake.





And yes KJ was quicker, and a better shooter than Tiny Archibald. If you haven't seen them both play, don't comment.

[Niquesports]

"He was in the HOF" (KJ isn't out for good either)
But he isnt a sure shot to get in either Tiny was
"He won All-Star MVP"

Yep sure did How many has KJ won in his 3 times playing
"He was rated Top 50 All-Time" (KJ's career wasn't finished then)

:roll:
Neither was Shaq's but some how the experts still picked him
These are the arguments you have left. God damn that is pathetic. Obviously we know who is done here. If all you have left are things like All-Star MVPs or HOFs, against a player who hasn't gotten a chance to become a HOF or wasn't done when Top 50 was selected....then I'm sorry, you are DONE

KJ is eligible now the voters just dont think he is worthy
So KJ career wasnt done thats why he didt get selected huh
Well why did Barkley,Karl Malone,Hakeem, Shaq,Pippen,Ewing,Stockton,Dumars,Drexler and Robinson get picked ????
there careers hadnt finished either


I also said, Tiny has finished on a losing team all his prime besides just one year. Therefore, I don't give a f*uck how many make playoffs. It's irrelevant for that argument.


Are we getting a little touchy cause your getting your a** whipped on this topic maybe you should do more research before you open you put your foot in your mouth next time



Yeah, comparing Granger to Melo is like comparing Tiny to KJ. Tiny is Granger, KJ is Melo.

Hello? Are you f*ucking retarded?

I think that would be you dummy comparing a All Time Great to a Very good player

Granger/Tiny:

All-Star
Arguably Better Statistics on Poor Teams

Melo/KJ:

All-Star
Arguably better statistics on Good Teams



Are you lacking common sense here? And I'm giving you some lead way here too. Because Melo had for sure worse stats than Granger, while KJ and Tiny are arguable, with advantage going to KJ. So KJ >>> Tiny more than Melo >>> Granger. That's the only difference here. Though I guess Tiny's out of prime makes up some of that, so its just like comparing Melo to Granger.





:roll:

So seems like your main arguments are arguments where Tiny was out of his prime. Didn't know when comparing players we should weigh their out of prime years more than their prime years. :oldlol:

By the way, KJ's peak came around the same time as Magic and Jordan's peak. The 2 best guards in the history of the game. Do you think even Tiny can make All-NBA 1st over them dumbass? Kevin Johnson was better than a peak John Stockton for comparison's sake.

Hey lil cry baby just cause your getting the S*** beat out of you no need for calling names LIL boy again Stocton is in the HOF KJ isnt



And yes KJ was quicker, and a better shooter than Tiny Archibald. If you haven't seen them both play, don't comment.
I have seen them both play and I was sober I guess your must have been drunk when you was watching TIny but reading your post I know you cant be much older than 15.

:roll:
THis Dip S*** think KJ was better than HOF'er TIny
:roll:
You must have went to school on the short yellow Bus

[GP_20]

I have seen them both play and I was sober I guess your must have been drunk when you was watching TIny but reading your post I know you cant be much older than 15.

:roll:
THis Dip S*** think KJ was better than HOF'er TIny
:roll:
You must have went to school on the short yellow Bus
:oldlol: No counter on any of my main arguments. The only counters you had were on the All-Star MVPs of Tiny (wow), and telling me KJ isn't like Shaq. (Wow)


These are signs that you have been dominated.



Hey Mr. I have seen KJ and Tiny play, in your unbiased opinion, which player was quicker and could shoot better? Since you have seen them play right?

[Niquesports]

:oldlol: No counter on any of my main arguments. The only counters you had were on the All-Star MVPs of Tiny (wow), and telling me KJ isn't like Shaq. (Wow)


These are signs that you have been dominated.



Hey Mr. I have seen KJ and Tiny play, in your unbiased opinion, which player was quicker and could shoot better? Since you have seen them play right?
My counter is that Tiny has been acknowledged by the league for his play and KJ hasnt. YOu say wow to ALL Star MVP well how about him being in the Hall of Fame why isnt KJ in if he's so great he is eligible why isnt KJ named 1 of the top 50 others who were still active got named ? How many times did KJ make all NBA after 91-92 ? when Magic was no longer a factor.

Yes as a 45 year old man I have watched them both and I feel comfortable saying Tiny was as fast if not faster than KJ

As far as shooting who cares like I said Steve Kerr was a better shooter than Tiny. KJ did not have the skill level to score 30 a game night in night out. Very few players do Tiny just happens to be one of them

Im really get a good laugh out of this you have yet to address if KJ is so much better than Tiny why is Tiny in the HOF and KJ isnt and Why is Tiny a top 50 and KJ isnt ?
Please explain this for me

[GP_20]

My counter is that Tiny has been acknowledged by the league for his play and KJ hasnt. YOu say wow to ALL Star MVP well how about him being in the Hall of Fame why isnt KJ in if he's so great he is eligible why isnt KJ named 1 of the top 50 others who were still active got named ? How many times did KJ make all NBA after 91-92 ? when Magic was no longer a factor.

Yes as a 45 year old man I have watched them both and I feel comfortable saying Tiny was as fast if not faster than KJ

As far as shooting who cares like I said Steve Kerr was a better shooter than Tiny. KJ did not have the skill level to score 30 a game night in night out. Very few players do Tiny just happens to be one of them

Im really get a good laugh out of this you have yet to address if KJ is so much better than Tiny why is Tiny in the HOF and KJ isnt and Why is Tiny a top 50 and KJ isnt ?
Please explain this for me

So you're telling me your only arguments are based on the recognition Tiny has gotten by the league which KJ hasn't? (HOF, Top 50 Players). That's it? :oldlol:
Even though every type of other analysis favors KJ?


Well, to quickly go over that. KJ in my opinion is the most underrated player in NBA History. Now, if he is the most underrated, do you expect him to get all the recognition he deserves? Of course not! That's the definition of underrated. As for the Top 50, once again, KJ is not O'Neal, and his career was not complete in 1996.

And once again, every other type of analysis favors KJ (which we have gone over). All you have is the recognition the league has given Tiny, and I've already explained that KJ is underrated. If you want examples of KJ being underrated besides this one, I can give those too.



Lastly, if you REALLY saw KJ and Tiny play, in an unbiased POV, tell me which player was quicker (which is a big part of both their games), and who was the better shooter.

[Niquesports]

So you're telling me your only arguments are based on the recognition Tiny has gotten by the league which KJ hasn't? (HOF, Top 50 Players). That's it? :oldlol:
Even though every type of other analysis favors KJ?

WHat better analysis is there than league and peer recognition ?
Are you saying your personal OPinion has greater insight than the people that are in the game ?
Well, to quickly go over that. KJ in my opinion is the most underrated player in NBA History. Now, if he is the most underrated, do you expect him to get all the recognition he deserves? Of course not! That's the definition of underrated. As for the Top 50, once again, KJ is not O'Neal, and his career was not complete in 1996.

I would agree that KJ is underrated but so is Mark Price, Mitch Richmond, Rolondo Blackman, as far as History goes so was Hal Greer,Dennis Johnson, Gus Williams,Mark Jackson this is the group KJ is in TIny is in the group with Isiah, Stockton,Walt Frazier ect... you HOF'ers
Again what does KJ career not being complete have to do with him not being selceted top 50 I listed Barkley,Malone,Hakeem,ONeal,Pippen,Dumars,Drexler, these guys had yet to complete there careers also but were still selected.
And once again, every other type of analysis favors KJ (which we have gone over). All you have is the recognition the league has given Tiny, and I've already explained that KJ is underrated. If you want examples of KJ being underrated besides this one, I can give those too.

Ok KJ is overrated because you say so may its just that a Player needs to win a title,be selceted First team All NBA win a MVp award lead the league in assist something to be a HOFer or top 50 player maybe its not just that they dont like him maybe he was just a very good player not GREAT.
Lastly, if you REALLY saw KJ and Tiny play, in an unbiased POV, tell me which player was quicker (which is a big part of both their games), and who was the better shooter.


OK who really cares who was the quicker or who was the better shooter
There have been many many PG quciker and faster than MAgic but not one is better so what does it matter who was quciker or the better shooter?
IF you think TIny was slow you must have only seen him when he was with Boston after years of injuries.

[GP_20]

OK who really cares who was the quicker or who was the better shooter
There have been many many PG quciker and faster than MAgic but not one is better so what does it matter who was quciker or the better shooter?
IF you think TIny was slow you must have only seen him when he was with Boston after years of injuries.
I'm trying to figure out if you have seem a prime Tiny or not. That's why I'm asking, it has nothing to do with who is better obviously, I understand that, and you've repeated this 5 times now. I'm just seeing if you've seen a prime Tiny or not.

So give me a unbiased answer, 1 answer, who was quicker, Tiny or KJ. Since this is a major aspect of their games. Who was the better shooter also?



Also, all your arguments are based on league recognition. KJ is the most underrated player ever, Tiny is arguably the most overrated. Considering that, who do you think will get more league recognition? :hammerhead: Peak KJ was better than peak Stockton. That's how good he was.

[Niquesports]

I'm trying to figure out if you have seem a prime Tiny or not. That's why I'm asking, it has nothing to do with who is better obviously, I understand that, and you've repeated this 5 times now. I'm just seeing if you've seen a prime Tiny or not.

So give me a unbiased answer, 1 answer, who was quicker, Tiny or KJ. Since this is a major aspect of their games. Who was the better shooter also?



Also, all your arguments are based on league recognition. KJ is the most underrated player ever, Tiny is arguably the most overrated. Considering that, who do you think will get more league recognition? :hammerhead: Peak KJ was better than peak Stockton. That's how good he was.

OK how many times do I have to tell you yes I saw Tiny with the Kings and remeber it well going to see him play the Bullets .

and again what does who was faster or who was the better shooter have to do with who was better at there prime? Who played better is the better question I'd say Tiny.

When has anyone proclaimed that KJ is the most underrated player ever to be fact. What is Fact is TIny is in the HOF KJ isnt What is fact TIny is a top 50 KJ isnt. WHy do so many people Hate on KJ News Flash maybe it isnt hating maybe KJ was just not HOF caliber player

[Niquesports]

I'm trying to figure out if you have seem a prime Tiny or not. That's why I'm asking, it has nothing to do with who is better obviously, I understand that, and you've repeated this 5 times now. I'm just seeing if you've seen a prime Tiny or not.

So give me a unbiased answer, 1 answer, who was quicker, Tiny or KJ. Since this is a major aspect of their games. Who was the better shooter also?



Also, all your arguments are based on league recognition. KJ is the most underrated player ever, Tiny is arguably the most overrated. Considering that, who do you think will get more league recognition? :hammerhead: Peak KJ was better than peak Stockton. That's how good he was.

Again more people would disagree with you than agree that PEEK KJ was better than Peek Stock. DOnt let this whipping Im giving you make you miss understand me I think KJ was a Great player just not a HOF quality player Im not sure I would even rank him over Dennis Johnson peek or career.

[GP_20]

OK how many times do I have to tell you yes I saw Tiny with the Kings and remeber it well going to see him play the Bullets .

and again what does who was faster or who was the better shooter have to do with who was better at there prime? Who played better is the better question I'd say Tiny.

When has anyone proclaimed that KJ is the most underrated player ever to be fact. What is Fact is TIny is in the HOF KJ isnt What is fact TIny is a top 50 KJ isnt. WHy do so many people Hate on KJ News Flash maybe it isnt hating maybe KJ was just not HOF caliber player

I can give you more examples where KJ has been underrated that you won't be able to explain.


And who is quicker has possibly nothing to do with who is better. Though it is a big part of both their games. I'm just trying to figure out if you saw them or not. :banghead:

Get it?

It has nothing to do with who was better. I'm just trying to figure out if you saw them.


So who was quicker, prime KJ or prime Tiny? Also who was the better shooter? One answer for each.

[GP_20]

Again more people would disagree with you than agree that PEEK KJ was better than Peek Stock. DOnt let this whipping Im giving you make you miss understand me I think KJ was a Great player just not a HOF quality player Im not sure I would even rank him over Dennis Johnson peek or career.
:roll:

You've been completely owned I hope you realize that. All you have left is "Tiny was Top 50" or "Tiny is a HOF". Do you realize how weak those arguments are? Especially considering Tiny is one of the most overrated, while KJ is hte most underrated. That makes your arguments really nothing. They are zero.

[Niquesports]

I can give you more examples where KJ has been underrated that you won't be able to explain.


And who is quicker has possibly nothing to do with who is better. Though it is a big part of both their games. I'm just trying to figure out if you saw them or not. :banghead:

Get it?

It has nothing to do with who was better. I'm just trying to figure out if you saw them.


So who was quicker, prime KJ or prime Tiny? Also who was the better shooter? One answer for each.
Again whats your point what are you trying to prove ok this mihgt be fun
TIny was quicker and KJ was the better shooter have fun with it.
How is this going to prove if I saw them play or not.

[Niquesports]

:roll:

You've been completely owned I hope you realize that. All you have left is "Tiny was Top 50" or "Tiny is a HOF". Do you realize how weak those arguments are? Especially considering Tiny is one of the most overrated, while KJ is hte most underrated. That makes your arguments really nothing. They are zero.
:roll: :roll: :roll:

DO you have a clue how silly you sound. take a second and read what your typing. Give me a link of an article in a news paper magazine flyer or send me a clip on ESPN CBS ABC NBC the Disney Channel anything that backs up what your saying that Tiny is overrated.Show me something that backs up your opinion. I said Tiny was better and I used league accomplishments what have you used NOTHING Guess what KJ is the most overrated player in all of SPORTS :hammertime:

[Bigsmoke]

Chauncey Billups > Steve Nash


and i though Isiah Thomas was good at defense....

[GP_20]

Again whats your point what are you trying to prove ok this mihgt be fun
TIny was quicker and KJ was the better shooter have fun with it.
How is this going to prove if I saw them play or not.
Wow you just walked into my trap. Article from New York Times in 1991.




PRO BASKETBALL; Speedy Johnson Races to the Top
GOLDAPER, SAM. New York Times. (Late Edition (East Coast)). New York, N.Y.: Feb 10, 1991. pg. A.6

He is nearly 25 years old, looks younger and has an altar boy demeanor. He is earning $1,750,000 this season and will reach $2,750,000 in 1995 as part of his seven-year, $15 million contract. Not bad for someone who grew up in the poor section of Sacramento, Calif., thinking baseball rather than basketball.

He is Kevin Johnson, K.J. to some, the point guard of blinding speed, quickness, athleticism, passing ability and penetration for the Phoenix Suns. He is also the starting point guard for the Western Conference in today's National Basketball Association All-Star Game in Charlotte, N.C.

While Johnson has gained increasing individual recognition, he has been even more impressive as a part of the team resurgence of the Suns, who have risen from 28 victories in 1987-88 to become a title contender in the last three seasons.

"He has meant everything to this team," said Cotton Fitzsimmons, who took over as the Suns' coach for the 1988-89 season.

That was the season Johnson gained membership in the exclusive 20-10 club by averaging 20.4 points and 12.2 assists a game. He was in lofty company: Oscar Robertson, Isiah Thomas, Magic Johnson and Nate Archibald are the only other players to have accomplished the feat in the history of the N.B.A. He did it again last year and is well on his way to a reprise again this season, averaging 22.2 points (14th in the league), 10.1 assists (4th) and 2.5 steals (5th) after 46 games.

Johnson, who prefers using "we," instead of "I," would rather not discuss being a member of that illustrious club.

But when pressed, he did.

"It wasn't my goal; it's just something that occurred," Johnson said. "My goal is always for the team to have a successful season. Magic and Isiah are my contemporaries and they have championship rings. So does Robertson and Archibald. If I want to be considered in their category, I've got to get a ring. That's how I look at it."

Johnson is often compared with outstanding players past and present, and the same names keep coming up. An informal survey of several players, coaches and general managers produced opinions that the right-handed Sun guard can penetrate like Magic Johnson, is as quick with the ball as John Stockton, and is as good with his left hand as Larry Bird.

But the name that surfaced most often in the comparisons was that of Nate (Tiny) Archibald, the only player ever to have led the N.B.A. in both scoring (34.0) and assists (11.4). He did it playing for the Kansas City-Omaha Kings in the 1972-73 season.

"He's quicker than I was and is a better shooter," Archibald said last week at the Legends Game at Madison Square Garden. "He has great determination. He'll do anything it takes to win."

Tom Chambers, Johnson's high-scoring teammate, said, "K.J. has the quickest first step I've ever seen."

Rory Sparrow, the Sacramento Kings' playmaker, said: "He has unbelievable quickness and is a great jumper. He's very tough to guard. The best way to do it is to back off on him and make him prove he can consistently hit the outside jumper."

"K.J. is a rocket," said Maurice Cheeks, the Knicks' point guard. "He's so explosive that he almost invites you to double-team him so he can get by you."

"Tiny was slicker," said Fitzsimmons, who has coached many other outstanding point guards, Archibald and Phil Ford among them, in his 18 years as an N.B.A. coach. "He really knew how to maneuver. Kevin has a great step to basket and is a more physical player. I take him for granted; he's the best I've ever coached. The only way to stop Kevin is to hold him. If the officials don't curtail it, he's unstoppable."

Paul Westphal and Lionel Hollins, both former All-Star guards, now assistant coaches with the Suns, have helped Johnson expand his natural repertory. Naturally ambidextrous, Westphal, who is scheduled to be the Suns' coach when Fitzsimmons retires, has taught Johnson to use the left-hand drive. Hollins has shown him how to use his body and the rim to frustrate shot blockers and how to better find the open man when he is double-teamed.

The 6-foot-1-inch Johnson has become one of the league's most productive point guards in just four pro seasons after a rocky start.

In 1987, his selection as the seventh player in the draft by the Cleveland Cavaliers was met with boos and groans of disappointment by fans. Few had heard of Johnson and some skeptics even questioned the sanity of Wayne Embry, the general manager, who drafted him.

Embry was sure he had made the correct choice.

The Cavs had done their homework well. Johnson, who attended the University of California, was the Golden Bears' career leader in scoring (1,665 points), assists (521) and steals (155).

"We watched films and liked what we saw," Embry said. "We got good reports on him from everywhere but it was his play at the Aloha Classic in Hawaii that moved him up as a lottery pick in most everyone's estimation."

Johnson, describing his trip to Hawaii as "one for business," said he went there to show everyone that "I was a true point guard."

"I had to beat the rap of being a shooting guard in a point guard's body," he said.

Embry was more certain he had made the right choice when he and Gary Fitzsimmons, the Cavaliers' player-personnel director, went to the airport to pick up Johnson for his first news conference. Gary Fitzsimmons is Cotton's son.

"The kid had great personality," Embry said. "As he got off the plane, it was like President Reagan had arrived. He was smiling, joking around and shaking every hand in sight."

But the Cavaliers already had a point guard, a good one at that, in Mark Price. Rather than let one of them languish on the bench, four months into Johnson's rookie season, Johnson was the central figure in a five-player trade that brought Larry Nance to Cleveland.

"We didn't think they could survive together," said Embry, who said he remained a fan of Johnson. "Mark needed the playing time and so did Kevin."

Johnson looks back at his rookie season with Cleveland, when he averaged 20 minutes in 52 games, as a learning experience. "There was a night and day difference between Price and myself," he said. "He taught me so much in a short period of time. I told myself that when I came back for my second season, I would implement all the things he taught me. Whether it was practice or a game, he did everything with the same consistency. He took 500 shots in practice every day, maybe more. If he would have given me one inch, I thought I would have been able to challenge him for the job. He never gave me that inch."

Johnson likes playing in the Pacific Division, and with the Suns in particular, where the offense is more suited to his game.

"Cleveland was a half-court team," he said, "geared to go inside and slow it up. Here, we run and push the ball up the court and, play tough defense. Our objective is to run and outhustle the opposition at both ends of the court."

Johnson believes that "it was one of the greatest trades of all time."

"It was meant to benefit both teams and it has," he said.

A lot of good things have happened to Johnson in Phoenix, the latest of which has been his elevation to starter in the All-Star Game.

What a difference a year makes. The Western Conference coaches voted him on to last year's team as a reserve. But he was in awe of being in the company of Magic Johnson, Michael Jordan, Larry Bird and Akeem Olajuwon and felt more like a spectator than a participant.

"I was so excited I didn't even care if I played," he said. "It was just a dream come true to have my name announced during the introductions and to sit on the bench and be able to listen to Pat Riley in the huddle asking Magic who he wanted to guard on defense, Larry Bird or Michael Jordan."

Today, he will be playing alongside Magic in an all-Johnson starting backcourt.

[Photograph]
Kevin Johnson driving around John Stockton of the Jazz. (Reuters)

[Illustration]
"Watching a Sun Rise," showing Kevin Johnson's year-by-year statistics.


Quote from that article:


But the name that surfaced most often in the comparisons was that of Nate (Tiny) Archibald, the only player ever to have led the N.B.A. in both scoring (34.0) and assists (11.4). He did it playing for the Kansas City-Omaha Kings in the 1972-73 season.

"He's quicker than I was and is a better shooter," Archibald said last week at the Legends Game at Madison Square Garden. "He has great determination. He'll do anything it takes to win."



Tiny Archibald himself said that KJ was quicker and a better shooter. Yet you say otherwise. :roll:


Okay at least we know you never saw them play. Either that, or you are totally biased for Tiny. Well that applies either way.

[Skywalker]

i skimmed over all of this Tiny vs. KJ debate, and Glove has made lots of good points about KJ, and his argument is stronger. I would've ranked Tiny higher earlier, but after finding out he has made playoffs just once in his prime, I have changed my mind. I mean that is inexcusable.

glove got the better of this debate, you just got owned just right now with that article Glove posted. Glove does it again with another great rankings thread, good stuff :applause:

[GP_20]

i skimmed over all of this Tiny vs. KJ debate, and Glove has made lots of good points about KJ, and his argument is stronger. I would've ranked Tiny higher earlier, but after finding out he has made playoffs just once in his prime, I have changed my mind. I mean that is inexcusable.

glove got the better of this debate, you just got owned just right now with that article Glove posted. Glove does it again with another great rankings thread, good stuff :applause:

Yeah thanks


Niquesprts is an idiot really. Even a blindman after reading this debate can see KJ >>> Tiny. He's just too biased and blind. Even Archibald would laugh at his @ss (see article above).

[Niquesports]

Wow you just walked into my trap. Article from New York Times in 1991.






Quote from that article:


But the name that surfaced most often in the comparisons was that of Nate (Tiny) Archibald, the only player ever to have led the N.B.A. in both scoring (34.0) and assists (11.4). He did it playing for the Kansas City-Omaha Kings in the 1972-73 season.

"He's quicker than I was and is a better shooter," Archibald said last week at the Legends Game at Madison Square Garden. "He has great determination. He'll do anything it takes to win."



Tiny Archibald himself said that KJ was quicker and a better shooter. Yet you say otherwise. :roll:


Okay at least we know you never saw them play. Either that, or you are totally biased for Tiny. Well that applies either way.


I cant believe how silly you are. ITs almost childish.

[Silverbullit]

Yeah thanks


Niquesprts is an idiot really. Even a blindman after reading this debate can see KJ >>> Tiny. He's just too biased and blind. Even Archibald would laugh at his @ss (see article above).

I'm not a blind man, but I can't see KJ >>> Tiny.

[Niquesports]

Wow you just walked into my trap. Article from New York Times in 1991.






Quote from that article:


But the name that surfaced most often in the comparisons was that of Nate (Tiny) Archibald, the only player ever to have led the N.B.A. in both scoring (34.0) and assists (11.4). He did it playing for the Kansas City-Omaha Kings in the 1972-73 season.

"He's quicker than I was and is a better shooter," Archibald said last week at the Legends Game at Madison Square Garden. "He has great determination. He'll do anything it takes to win."



Tiny Archibald himself said that KJ was quicker and a better shooter. Yet you say otherwise. :roll:


Okay at least we know you never saw them play. Either that, or you are totally biased for Tiny. Well that applies either way.


THis is like playing with a kid. You get a good laugh cause you think I walked into your trap. WOW great job. Hey guess what I thought we were talking about who was better in there prime.
Talking about a lost child you go from comparing a TOP 50 HOFer get your a** kicked in that to cause you found some article now you want to talke about who was quicker I could really care less hey Dumb A** Muggys was quicker than Magic unlike you Im a grown Man I dont need to prove to you that I saw them both play my point was that tiny was the better player and I proved IT. IF anyone is biased its you and your love affection with KJ.

[Niquesports]

Yeah thanks


Niquesprts is an idiot really. Even a blindman after reading this debate can see KJ >>> Tiny. He's just too biased and blind. Even Archibald would laugh at his @ss (see article above).


YOur right Glove I must admit you got me 3 time All Star never been a First team All NBA KJ is better than HOF'er ,Top 50 Only player in the History of the NBA to lead the league in Scoring and Assist in the same season ALL STar MVP member of a title team Tiny.
Yea i WAS BLIND NOW i CAN SEE
:roll:
tALKING ABOUT A duMB a**

[GP_20]

I'm not a blind man, but I can't see KJ >>> Tiny.
Then you probably can't see why Melo >>> Granger huh?

Tiny has had a losing season every year of his prime but once. Name me another all-time great with that pathetic of team success. Even AI's team success is vastly superior than that.

[GP_20]

YOur right Glove I must admit you got me 3 time All Star never been a First team All NBA KJ is better than HOF'er ,Top 50 Only player in the History of the NBA to lead the league in Scoring and Assist in the same season ALL STar MVP member of a title team Tiny.
Yea i WAS BLIND NOW i CAN SEE
:roll:
tALKING ABOUT A duMB a**
:roll:
I can't believe you are still talking. I mean, do you have not have any shame? You remind of Pleezebelieve. You act the same way.

First of all, Tiny Archibald himself would disagree with your assessment of the 2 players, and I've already proven that. Where does that leave you? How much credibility do you have? You think Tiny is quicker, but Tiny himself says KJ is quicker. You know what that makes you, unbelievable biased.


2nd, once again, All-Time underrated players aren't supposed to get recognition by definition dumbass. This is not rocket science.



Take Granger and Tiny. I'll take Melo and KJ. Take Durant and Tiny. I'll take LeBron and Tiny. This is what it comes down to.



Otherwise, name me another All-Time legend that not been on a losing team just once in his prime. I'm still waiting. You can't find any? Why? Because Tiny doesn't belong in those guy's level. He is on Tim Hardaway level, KJ is on the Stockton, Payton, Isiah, level.

[GP_20]

i skimmed over all of this Tiny vs. KJ debate, and Glove has made lots of good points about KJ, and his argument is stronger. I would've ranked Tiny higher earlier, but after finding out he has made playoffs just once in his prime, I have changed my mind. I mean that is inexcusable.

glove got the better of this debate, you just got owned just right now with that article Glove posted. Glove does it again with another great rankings thread, good stuff :applause:

By the way NiqueSports....look at what the common man is saying. You are getting owned man. This is exactly how it is with Pleezebelieve. Everyone is saying that Pleezebelieve is losing hte argument, but only pleezebelieve thinks otherwise. It's kind of pathetic. Just shut up already. I'm tired of owning little kids like you.

I mean, just read the post above. Nothing else needs to be said. You come off as looking pathetic.

[23ajay]

archibald should take nashs place

[Showtime]

I'm so tired of people looking at team success without context.

When KJ first came to the suns, they had a good team with Chambers and KJ leading the way. They had good support players in Eddie Johnson, Horny, young Thunder Dan, etc. They stayed good with that group until they got Barkley in '93, and we know the rest of the story. What good supporting casts/other stars did Tiny have? Sam Lacey? Van Arsdale? Get real. How do they compare to Chambers, Barkley, and a cast of good support players?

Kevin Johnson had team success because he was on good teams. He was one of the top players on those teams, and was a huge reason why they were successful, but they had talent. They had other stars. They had good support players and deep teams. Let's stop acting like every Suns win was because of KJ and every Kings/Royals loss was because of Tiny. Sometimes great players are on bad teams, and they can't all carry the entire team to success. Mitch Richmond was one of those players. So was McGrady in Orlando. AI in Philly. Kobe after Shaq left. What happens if the Gasol gift never happens? Do you honestly think they start making finals after finals without him? He couldn't keep up that 2006 level for that long, and probably would have missed the playoffs more and more with the rising of some western teams. Great talent can lose.

[GP_20]

I'm so tired of people looking at team success without context.

When KJ first came to the suns, they had a good team with Chambers and KJ leading the way. They had good support players in Eddie Johnson, Horny, young Thunder Dan, etc. They stayed good with that group until they got Barkley in '93, and we know the rest of the story. What good supporting casts/other stars did Tiny have? Sam Lacey? Van Arsdale? Get real. How do they compare to Chambers, Barkley, and a cast of good support players?

Kevin Johnson had team success because he was on good teams. He was one of the top players on those teams, and was a huge reason why they were successful, but they had talent. They had other stars. They had good support players and deep teams. Let's stop acting like every Suns win was because of KJ and every Kings/Royals loss was because of Tiny. Sometimes great players are on bad teams, and they can't all carry the entire team to success. Mitch Richmond was one of those players. So was McGrady in Orlando. AI in Philly. Kobe after Shaq left. What happens if the Gasol gift never happens? Do you honestly think they start making finals after finals without him? He couldn't keep up that 2006 level for that long, and probably would have missed the playoffs more and more with the rising of some western teams.

Showtime, promise to stay logical/rational like your post above and you will understand...

In the 4 seasons prior to KJ's first full year in Phoenix, the Suns won 26, 21, 36, and 28 games, missing the playoffs each year. In KJ's first full season, the Suns went from 28-54 to 55-27 and the WCF.

Although he didn't do it alone, he was the most important part of that turnaround in Phoenix. He sparked that offense and was clearly the best player on the Suns. Hornacek had this to say

"You were the player who guided a team and franchise out of bad times and into the power they are today. We would have never gone from 28 wins to 55 wins in one year without you, nor would the Suns have played for the championship without your leadership, play and dedication."

Tom Chambers, who was also a big part of that team, said

And last but certainly not least, the guy who made me the player I am. I couldn't have done it without him - Kevin Johnson.

His had his best years with KJ.
Also, the team struggled when KJ was out. I can show some numbers for that as well if you want. He was the main passer on that offense, and one of leading scorers. Therefore it's clear, he was the main guy on that team.


So what's the point? Well one that KJ was able to turn around a falling franchise. And was the leader in doing so.

But more importantly, let's talk about Tiny Archibald. You brought up Iverson, Kobe, McGrady, etc. Well the difference between those players and Tiny was that those players were still able to lead their teams to the playoffs despite their horrible starcasts. Tiny Archibald finished with a non-losing season just once in his prime. No other All-Time legend has a prime that sad. Can you name me any other All-Time star that makes playoffs just once in his prime? Like I said, that is a waste of a prime. McGrady, Kobe, etc. all of them made playoffs with horrible starcasts. I'm not talking about winning the championship hear, or even getting through the 1st round, or even making playoffs for that matter, just do not finish with a losing record. Is that really hard to do? I'm sure excluding Tiny, the rest of the Top 100 players were able to do that. Some with starcasts as bad.


Staying away from a losing record is not that hard if you call yourself a Top 10 PG of All-Time. Tiny should've been able to do it. He wasn't able to though. Selfish play will do that. KJ on the other hand, his career is highlighted by being able to bring out the best out of his teammates (something Tiny could not do), and help turn around the Sun's Franchise.

[Showtime]

Showtime, promise to stay logical/rational like your post above and you will understand...

Stop being a condescending prick.


In the 4 seasons prior to KJ's first full year in Phoenix, the Suns won 26, 21, 36, and 28 games, missing the playoffs each year. In KJ's first full season, the Suns went from 28-54 to 55-27 and the WCF.

Yet again, you have blinders on. In those 4 seasons, did they have that cast that I clearly stated? No. They had Larry Nance and Walter Davis. No slouches in their own right, but I clearly stated the supporting cast that KJ had. When KJ came to the suns, they were in the middle of the season. KJ's first full season was their 27 win jump, but he wasn't the only difference. Tom Chambers also came to the team, putting up 26/8/3 and leading the team with KJ. To act like KJ made the difference alone is moronic, which is what you are trying to do. Yes, KJ had a big impact, but to dismiss every other factor just shows you are using selective logic. Fact: from KJ's first full season with the suns to the arrival of Barkley, they had a talented and deep team.


Although he didn't do it alone, he was the most important part of that turnaround in Phoenix. He sparked that offense and was clearly the best player on the Suns. Hornacek had this to say

"You were the player who guided a team and franchise out of bad times and into the power they are today. We would have never gone from 28 wins to 55 wins in one year without you, nor would the Suns have played for the championship without your leadership, play and dedication."

Tom Chambers, who was also a big part of that team, said

And last but certainly not least, the guy who made me the player I am. I couldn't have done it without him - Kevin Johnson.

And none of this contradicts what I said. Horny said the suns wouldn't as good without KJ, which is totally true. He was a big part of why they were successful. They wouldn't have gone from 28 wins to 55 wins without KJ, nor would they make that jump without Chambers. I don't see them making that jump with KJ being the only difference.

And Chambers was a top forward with the sonics before coming to the suns. But under that offense with KJ, he had the best production of his career. It's not like he developed as a young player under KJ.


Also, the team struggled when KJ was out. I can show some numbers for that as well if you want. He was the main passer on that offense, and one of leading scorers. Therefore it's clear, he was the main guy on that team.

Again, I'm not disputing his important role on the team, nor did I say he didn't make any difference. You are clearly not comprehending my point. KJ, while being a great player, was part of a great team that was deep and talented, and Tiny during his prime did not have such talent and depth. So to put all of the suns success on KJ and all of the Kings/Royals losses on Tiny is foolish. For somebody who touts their own logical thinking, you really missed the boat on this one.


But more importantly, let's talk about Tiny Archibald. You brought up Iverson, Kobe, McGrady, etc. Well the difference between those players and Tiny was that those players were still able to lead their teams to the playoffs despite their horrible starcasts.

Yet Tiny lead his team to the playoffs in '75. So he was able to accomplish that. So your point is moot.


Tiny Archibald finished with a non-losing season just once in his prime. No other All-Time legend has a prime that sad. Can you name me any other All-Time star that makes playoffs just once in his prime?

Can you name me a six year span of time that another star had such bad teams? All those other players had talent come to their teams and help turn things around or they eventually were traded or left. Even Iverson, while being on some really bad teams that lost, still eventually got one of the top defensive teams and made a run. McGrady left Orlando after 4 years. Kobe didn't have a bad team very long with the Gasol trade. So as I already said: all of those players have gone through situations like that, which proves that top talent can still lose. The difference is that those players' circumstances changed, while Tiny's didn't in 6 seasons. Why you can't grasp this point is beyond me.


Like I said, that is a waste of a prime.

Yes, it is a waste of prime, just like 2005 was a waste for Kobe, Richmond wasted away in Sacramento, McGrady's prime was wasted in Orlando, etc etc. But it doesn't mean that time was wasted because they weren't good players.


McGrady, Kobe, etc. all of them made playoffs with horrible starcasts. I'm not talking about winning the championship hear, or even getting through the 1st round, or even making playoffs for that matter, just do not finish with a losing record. Is that really hard to do? I'm sure excluding Tiny, the rest of the Top 100 players were able to do that. Some with starcasts as bad.

You are making two different arguments. Making the playoffs isn't the same as getting a winning record, because a team can still have a sub .500 record and make the playoffs. This is something you have continued to link throughout your argument, so get it straight.


Staying away from a losing record is not that hard if you call yourself a Top 10 PG of All-Time. Tiny should've been able to do it.

Why should he? Because you say he should? Well, I say Kobe should have made the playoffs in 2005 with Odom and Caron Butler. Guess he sucks because I think he should have been able to do it then. Just because you think he should have been better doesn't mean anything. And not that hard? How the **** would you know anything about how hard it is to lead a NBA team that sucks ass to the playoffs? Get off your soapbox you arrogant ass. IF TOP TALENT CAN ALWAYS DO THAT, THEN THERE'S NO EXCUSE FOR KOBE NOT MAKING THE PLAYOFFS AND HAVING A WINNING RECORD HIS ENTIRE CAREER, AND THE SAME GOES FOR JORDAN'S FIRST FEW YEARS AND KAJ WITH THE BUCKS, ETC ETC.

The fact is that the best of the best have proven that they can lose on a bad team. The difference is that circumstance lasted for the majority of Tiny's prime, and other players had relatively shorter spans of similar circumstances. Regardless, they still proved that some of the all time greats can lose on bad teams.

[Niquesports]

By the way NiqueSports....look at what the common man is saying. You are getting owned man. This is exactly how it is with Pleezebelieve. Everyone is saying that Pleezebelieve is losing hte argument, but only pleezebelieve thinks otherwise. It's kind of pathetic. Just shut up already. I'm tired of owning little kids like you.

I mean, just read the post above. Nothing else needs to be said. You come off as looking pathetic.


Oh yea Lil Boy Im getting owned the common Man:roll:
is against me the common man says KJ is better:roll:
But the players that played, the media that report the game and the coaches that coached the game voted Tiny TOp 50 and not KJ
THe HOF voters voted for Tiny and not KJ
TIny has been on a team and played a pivitol role KJ didnt
Tiny was voted First Team All NBA KJ wasnt
Tiny has done something no player in history has done KJ hasnt
Tiny has won an All Star MVP KJ hasnt
Tell me Glove look in the mirror and be honest with your self
YOu got Knock the F*** out on this one

[GP_20]

Stop being a condescending prick.


Sorry but you have failed.




Yet again, you have blinders on. In those 4 seasons, did they have that cast that I clearly stated? No. They had Larry Nance and Walter Davis. No slouches in their own right, but I clearly stated the supporting cast that KJ had. When KJ came to the suns, they were in the middle of the season. KJ's first full season was their 27 win jump, but he wasn't the only difference. Tom Chambers also came to the team, putting up 26/8/3 and leading the team with KJ. To act like KJ made the difference alone is moronic, which is what you are trying to do. Yes, KJ had a big impact, but to dismiss every other factor just shows you are using selective logic. Fact: from KJ's first full season with the suns to the arrival of Barkley, they had a talented and deep team.


I'm not saying KJ did it alone. The very next sentence that you quoted said this


Although he didn't do it alone

So seriously Showtime? Are you stupid? I've clearly said he didn't do it alone, yet you have me saying I said he did it alone. I've never said that.




And none of this contradicts what I said. Horny said the suns wouldn't as good without KJ, which is totally true. He was a big part of why they were successful. They wouldn't have gone from 28 wins to 55 wins without KJ, nor would they make that jump without Chambers. I don't see them making that jump with KJ being the only difference.

And Chambers was a top forward with the sonics before coming to the suns. But under that offense with KJ, he had the best production of his career. It's not like he developed as a young player under KJ.

Once again, I said KJ didn't do it alone, but was the most important factor, he was the focal point of that offense and got it running. He brought the best out of his teammates and the team struggled when he went down.




Again, I'm not disputing his important role on the team, nor did I say he didn't make any difference. You are clearly not comprehending my point. KJ, while being a great player, was part of a great team that was deep and talented, and Tiny during his prime did not have such talent and depth. So to put all of the suns success on KJ and all of the Kings/Royals losses on Tiny is foolish. For somebody who touts their own logical thinking, you really missed the boat on this one.

:hammerhead:
Once again. I never put all the success the Sun's had on KJ. I never said he did it alone. Let me show you my quote again



Although he didn't do it alone

Showtime, do you know how to f*ucking read? Where did you read that I said he did it alone, when I clearly said he didn't. :oldlol:
I'm sorry, but this is just sad. That was what half of your post was after. KJ did NOT do it alone. Let me repeat, KJ did NOT do it alone. Can you hear me now? KJ led the turnaround, but he didn't do it alone. Both these points are almost equally undeniable.



Yet Tiny lead his team to the playoffs in '75. So he was able to accomplish that. So your point is moot.

Once. I'm talking about their whole primes.




Can you name me a six year span of time that another star had such bad teams? All those other players had talent come to their teams and help turn things around or they eventually were traded or left. Even Iverson, while being on some really bad teams that lost, still eventually got one of the top defensive teams and made a run. McGrady left Orlando after 4 years. Kobe didn't have a bad team very long with the Gasol trade. So as I already said: all of those players have gone through situations like that, which proves that top talent can still lose. The difference is that those players' circumstances changed, while Tiny's didn't in 6 seasons. Why you can't grasp this point is beyond me.



Yes, it is a waste of prime, just like 2005 was a waste for Kobe, Richmond wasted away in Sacramento, McGrady's prime was wasted in Orlando, etc etc. But it doesn't mean that time was wasted because they weren't good players.



You are making two different arguments. Making the playoffs isn't the same as getting a winning record, because a team can still have a sub .500 record and make the playoffs. This is something you have continued to link throughout your argument, so get it straight.



Ok let's just stick with being on a losing team all their primes but one year. Since it's so "tough" to make playoffs in Tiny's years.

Iverson: 5/10 his 76ers had a non-losing record. 7/12 years of his prime.

McGrady: 3/4 years his Magic had a non-losing record. 7 out of the 8 seasons in his prime.

Kobe: 2 out of 3 years is Shaq/Gasol-less Lakers had a non-losing record. 9 out of 10 years of his career his team had a non-losing record.

Archibald: Only 1 out of his 6 years did he ever have a team with a non-losing record.

Kobe, McGrady, and even Iverson's success (though you can see why AI is sometimes criticized for this) is far superior than Archibald's. It's not even comparable.


I hope you see the difference here. I'm not talking about 1 season what Archibald or Kobe did. I'm talking about their whole primes, what did they do. Same with Jordan, same with whoever you bring up. The fact is, Archibald, only once in his whole prime was he on a non-losing record team.



Why should he? Because you say he should? Well, I say Kobe should have made the playoffs in 2005 with Odom and Caron Butler. Guess he sucks because I think he should have been able to do it then. Just because you think he should have been better doesn't mean anything. And not that hard? How the **** would you know anything about how hard it is to lead a NBA team that sucks ass to the playoffs? Get off your soapbox you arrogant ass. IF TOP TALENT CAN ALWAYS DO THAT, THEN THERE'S NO EXCUSE FOR KOBE NOT MAKING THE PLAYOFFS AND HAVING A WINNING RECORD HIS ENTIRE CAREER, AND THE SAME GOES FOR JORDAN'S FIRST FEW YEARS AND KAJ WITH THE BUCKS, ETC ETC.

The fact is that the best of the best have proven that they can lose on a bad team. The difference is that circumstance lasted for the majority of Tiny's prime, and other players had relatively shorter spans of similar circumstances. Regardless, they still proved that some of the all time greats can lose on bad teams.

Once again, not talking about 1 season. Kobe in 2005, is just one season.
Talk Kobe in his prime. You think if Kobe was on a losing season every year of his prime but once, anyone would even consider him ANYWHERE? Where would he be? Just imagine.

All the greats have been able to be on non-losing teams more than once in their primes. That is, but Tiny...

And we are talking about a guy that has been traded 2-3 times in his prime as well. He's gotten new situations, yet he still has failed. Kobe stayed in LA, got it done. AI stayed in Philly, got it done. McGrady got it done in Orlando. Jordan got it done in Chicago. Tiny, failed where he started, and failed elsewhere also. :oldlol:

And were his teammates really that bad?

Van Arsdale was an All-Star in 1972 while he played with a Prime Tiny.
Sam Lacey was one of the more solid bigmen. So despite playing with an All-Star, Tiny failed. Kobe, AI, McGrady never had the luxury of playing with an all-star in their bad teammate years. He had both of them in 73 as well.

In 1974 he had Jimmy Walker, former 1st pick of the draft who was capable of dropping 20ppg. He was still 29, and was still in All-Star form. He made All-Star team a year before joining Tiny, and hadn't dropped too far.

In 1975 he still had Jimmy Walker, and Sam Lacey. Sam Lacey was an All-Star, and now Top 3 in rebounding, and Top 10 in blocking. Obviously, one of the better big men in the league. Sam Lacey was also known for his defense. Once again, a player that is better than any of these other guys you are talking about played with.

I mean for god sakes, Tiny Archibald played with All-Stars in his prime. And other good players. Does anything more need to be said?

In 1976, he played with Walker, Lacey (who was still a beast), and another All-Star in Weldman. But once again, failure. And next year, failure 22 win season.






Do I need to go further? The fact is, All-Time greats find ways to finish on non-losing teams. Tiny should be no exception. He had All-Star players around him, but his teams had losing records. No other All-Time great has that on their record.

Think of Danny Granger, why doesn't he get as much recognition as Melo? Durant? Because they were on bad teams. Tiny is no exception.

[Niquesports]

Then you probably can't see why Melo >>> Granger huh?

Tiny has had a losing season every year of his prime but once. Name me another all-time great with that pathetic of team success. Even AI's team success is vastly superior than that.


WOuld you consider team sucess playing a major role on a Title team something KJ never did. Yes Boston was part of his prime I mean he did make an All Star Team during those years. By the way how many titles does Mister Team Success KJ have :roll:

[GP_20]

Oh yea Lil Boy Im getting owned the common Man:roll:
is against me the common man says KJ is better:roll:
But the players that played, the media that report the game and the coaches that coached the game voted Tiny TOp 50 and not KJ
THe HOF voters voted for Tiny and not KJ
TIny has been on a team and played a pivitol role KJ didnt
Tiny was voted First Team All NBA KJ wasnt
Tiny has done something no player in history has done KJ hasnt
Tiny has won an All Star MVP KJ hasnt
Tell me Glove look in the mirror and be honest with your self
YOu got Knock the F*** out on this one
The coaches that played, the media that reported the game, etc.


Say

Kobe deserves All-D 1st this year
Larry Hughes was once All-D 1st material
Camby was once DPOY material
Bill Russell >> Wilt
Dominique Wilkins and Bob McAdoo are not Top 50 players
DJ is not a HOF


Please tell me you agree with all of that or go f*uck yourself. Because if that is your only argument, then enough said.

[GP_20]

WOuld you consider team sucess playing a major role on a Title team something KJ never did. Yes Boston was part of his prime I mean he did make an All Star Team during those years. By the way how many titles does Mister Team Success KJ have :roll:


I would not call Boston his prime

Just shut the f*uck up now. You are choking on your own words. I don't really talk to backpeddlers who sing different tunes everyday.

[baseketball4life]

Glove is spot on. He has made some great points in this debate and i think its clear he has won. By the Niquesports, please just stop, all ur arguments are weak and have failed. You remind me of Sir Charles at this point. Saying the same things over and over again.

[Showtime]

I'm not saying KJ did it alone. The very next sentence that you quoted said this

So seriously Showtime? Are you stupid? I've clearly said he didn't do it alone, yet you have me saying I said he did it alone. I've never said that.

You never said "KJ did it alone", but you did imply that KJ was far and away the most important player as the basis of your argument. You clearly implied that by stating this:

"In the 4 seasons prior to KJ's first full year in Phoenix, the Suns won 26, 21, 36, and 28 games, missing the playoffs each year. In KJ's first full season, the Suns went from 28-54 to 55-27 and the WCF.

Although he didn't do it alone, he was the most important part of that turnaround in Phoenix. "

You said this AFTER I clearly commented on the talent of those teams. So while you are continuing to point out KJ being important to the suns, that was never the issue. The issue was the talented and deep teams that he had around him which was the reason why they were as successful as they were. This entire discussion was in response to your claim that Tiny is overrated because he didn't carry a team to the playoffs on his own enough times. KJ didn't either. He won with deep and talented teams, which is my point. KJ, while being a top player on the suns, didn't carry a bad team on his back to the playoffs.


Once again, I said KJ didn't do it alone, but was the most important factor, he was the focal point of that offense and got it running. He brought the best out of his teammates and the team struggled when he went down.

That doesn't change the fact that he had a very deep and talented team which was why they were so successful. From his first full season to the arrival of Barkley, he had more than Tiny did during his prime, which is the point. You can't give KJ all the credit because he didn't carry a poor team on his back. He helped a very good team as a top player. Tiny didn't have that luxury, so they can't be compared. You can't give KJ all (or the vast majority) the credit for their success and Tiny all the blame for failure, which is what you are doing in this context of individual impact.


:hammerhead:
Once again. I never put all the success the Sun's had on KJ. I never said he did it alone. Let me show you my quote again

Showtime, do you know how to f*ucking read? Where did you read that I said he did it alone, when I clearly said he didn't. :oldlol:

Are you retarded? This entire conversation is about how you said Tiny couldn't carry a team on his back, while KJ was winning. WE ARE DISCUSSING THIS IN THAT CONTEXT. HOW CAN YOU NOT GRASP THIS? You say KJ is superior to Tiny because of Tiny's lack of team success in his prime. So, you are comparing INDIVIDUAL players on TEAM success. Why is this so hard for you to grasp? I'm pointing out a serious flaw in your argument which is this:

You say Tiny didn't carry his team to the playoffs and win enough to be a top 10 pg and rank over KJ. Yet, KJ never carried a low level team on his back either. He may have been arguably the best player on the team at one point, but because of the talent level and depth around him, he didn't have the same circumstances as Tiny. You can't compare the two. KJ didn't carry a lackluster team anywhere. He helped a very good team be even better, and always played with talent around him. That's why I keep saying he didn't do it alone, because you are totally missing the context of YOUR comparison and the flaws in YOUR argument.


I'm sorry, but this is just sad. That was what half of your post was after. KJ did NOT do it alone. Let me repeat, KJ did NOT do it alone. Can you hear me now? KJ led the turnaround, but he didn't do it alone. Both these points are almost equally undeniable.

]Once. I'm talking about their whole primes.

Once or more, it doesn't matter because he still did it. You said he couldn't, but he was able to accomplish that.


Ok let's just stick with being on a losing team all their primes but one year. Since it's so "tough" to make playoffs in Tiny's years.

Iverson: 5/10 his 76ers had a non-losing record. 7/12 years of his prime.

McGrady: 3/4 years his Magic had a non-losing record. 7 out of the 8 seasons in his prime.

Kobe: 2 out of 3 years is Shaq/Gasol-less Lakers had a non-losing record. 9 out of 10 years of his career his team had a non-losing record.

Archibald: Only 1 out of his 6 years did he ever have a team with a non-losing record.

Kobe, McGrady, and even Iverson's success (though you can see why AI is sometimes criticized for this) is far superior than Archibald's. It's not even comparable.

The point is they still had losing records and missed the playoffs, and none of them had as bad of a situation as Tiny over the course of their primes. None. But during the times where they did lose, it proves that top talent can lose on bad teams, which was the point all along.

Imagine Kobe in his 2005-06 situation for a 6 or 7 year span of time. Do you honestly think he could keep up that 2006 level and carry his teams to the playoffs on his back every single year? Of course not. So why does everybody just accept the ups and downs of teams with great players like that but then discard the fact that Tiny's prime was always on a horrible team? Just like some other great players: IT'S NOT THEIR FAULTS THEIR TEAMS DIDN'T WIN. Sometimes a guy can do all he can but it's not enough. Jordan has experienced it. Kareem has experienced it. Kobe has experienced it. Richmond has experienced it. This is something you can't seem to grasp.


I hope you see the difference here. I'm not talking about 1 season what Archibald or Kobe did. I'm talking about their whole primes, what did they do. Same with Jordan, same with whoever you bring up. The fact is, Archibald, only once in his whole prime was he on a non-losing record team.

THIS IS THE POINT: KOBE HAD AN EXTREMELY SHORT PERIOD SIMILAR TO TINY'S ENTIRE PRIME. Tiny was in Kobe's 2005-06 situation for SIX years. Kobe's situation changed. Jordan's situation changed. Kareem's situation changed. But the fact remains that they proved those situations can stop a team from success no matter who their best player is. Tiny's situation did NOT change. It stayed the same for 6 years. You can't blame him for circumstances out of his control.



Once again, not talking about 1 season. Kobe in 2005, is just one season.
Talk Kobe in his prime. You think if Kobe was on a losing season every year of his prime but once, anyone would even consider him ANYWHERE? Where would he be? Just imagine.

You are beyond ignorant. I've already CLEARLY explained how circumstances beyond a player's control, which includes the very best to ever play the game, can hamper a team. I've already CLEARLY explained how circumstances for those players changed, but Tiny's didn't through no fault of his own. There's nothing left to explain if you can't comprehend that. Your argument about team success during Tiny's prime as a reason why he should be ranked below KJ and top 10 = flawed.


And were his teammates really that bad?

Van Arsdale was an All-Star in 1972 while he played with a Prime Tiny.
Sam Lacey was one of the more solid bigmen. So despite playing with an All-Star, Tiny failed. Kobe, AI, McGrady never had the luxury of playing with an all-star in their bad teammate years. He had both of them in 73 as well.

So wait a minute: Tiny is bad because he was the franchise player on a losing franchise, but a second or third option borderline all star on those same 30 ish win teams are GOOD players? If that's the case, then why do you degrade Tiny? You downplay his reputation during that time as a top guard in the game. You downplay his HOF status. You downplay his top 50 status. All because of his teams' lack of success in his prime. Yet, the second or third option borderline allstars on those SAME 30ish win teams are great players? You are killing your own arguments. If those guys are top players because of their accolades, then Tiny is better than you say he is based upon the same criteria.

It's clear that your own logic kills your own opinion of Tiny. If his teammates aren't downgraded by your same criteria, than neither should Tiny. If he's overrated because his teams lost, then the second and third option borderline all stars should also be overrated and not good enough. It's clear that you can't accept that Tiny's teams in his prime just weren't good enough to compete with the ones in his division, conference, or league. It's clear that you can't grasp how the very best of the best can lose because of their team, but Tiny gets no such pass despite him being in a similar situation for an extended period of time. Just stop please. You are making yourself look foolish.

[chitownsfinest]

Niquesports is getting shred into pieces. LMAO

[Dr. Hoopenstein]

Bob Cousy doesn't belong on that list, he was good in his era but overall his skill set would come up short when compared w/ different eras- in my mind.

I'd put Nate "Tiny" Archibald in Cousy's place.

[Niquesports]

Sorry but you have failed.

I must amit even in defeat you hang in there Gp how sad though
I'm not saying KJ did it alone. The very next sentence that you quoted said this



So seriously Showtime? Are you stupid? I've clearly said he didn't do it alone, yet you have me saying I said he did it alone. I've never said that.

We know he didnt do it alone just like Tiny couln't win it alone
Once again, I said KJ didn't do it alone, but was the most important factor, he was the focal point of that offense and got it running. He brought the best out of his teammates and the team struggled when he went down.




:hammerhead:
Once again. I never put all the success the Sun's had on KJ. I never said he did it alone. Let me show you my quote again




Showtime, do you know how to f*ucking read? Where did you read that I said he did it alone, when I clearly said he didn't. :oldlol:
I'm sorry, but this is just sad. That was what half of your post was after. KJ did NOT do it alone. Let me repeat, KJ did NOT do it alone. Can you hear me now? KJ led the turnaround, but he didn't do it alone. Both these points are almost equally undeniable.




Once. I'm talking about their whole primes.





Ok let's just stick with being on a losing team all their primes but one year. Since it's so "tough" to make playoffs in Tiny's years.
Unlike in todays game in the early 70's only 5 teams per Conf made the playoffs. SO Tiny not making the playoffs on a very weak team isnt a surprise thats why most knowledgeable basketball minds dont hold this against him, you know the poeple that vote for the HOFers All NBA team All Star Games TOp 50 OF ALL TIME Players those minds are who Im talking about
Iverson: 5/10 his 76ers had a non-losing record. 7/12 years of his prime.

McGrady: 3/4 years his Magic had a non-losing record. 7 out of the 8 seasons in his prime.

Kobe: 2 out of 3 years is Shaq/Gasol-less Lakers had a non-losing record. 9 out of 10 years of his career his team had a non-losing record.

Archibald: Only 1 out of his 6 years did he ever have a team with a non-losing record.

OK its time to take the gloves off IN 73-74 Tiny only played 35 games so his team having a losing record isnt his fault.
IN 70-71 it was his rookie season ok it WASN"T his prime
IN 71-72 they finished 8 gm out of first place and missed the playoffs by only 2gm. looking at it this way with a very weak supporting cast doesnt look as bad as your trying to make it
72 -73 "BEGINGING OF HIS PRIME"
75-76 again missed the playoffs but only 7 gm out of first place and 5 gm out of the playoffs.
This six year period is not as bad as you have tried to make it.


Kobe, McGrady, and even Iverson's success (though you can see why AI is sometimes criticized for this) is far superior than Archibald's. It's not even comparable.


I hope you see the difference here. I'm not talking about 1 season what Archibald or Kobe did. I'm talking about their whole primes, what did they do. Same with Jordan, same with whoever you bring up. The fact is, Archibald, only once in his whole prime was he on a non-losing record team.



Once again, not talking about 1 season. Kobe in 2005, is just one season.
Talk Kobe in his prime. You think if Kobe was on a losing season every year of his prime but once, anyone would even consider him ANYWHERE? Where would he be? Just imagine.

All the greats have been able to be on non-losing teams more than once in their primes. That is, but Tiny...

And we are talking about a guy that has been traded 2-3 times in his prime as well. He's gotten new situations, yet he still has failed. Kobe stayed in LA, got it done. AI stayed in Philly, got it done. McGrady got it done in Orlando. Jordan got it done in Chicago. Tiny, failed where he started, and failed elsewhere also. :oldlol:

And were his teammates really that bad?

Van Arsdale was an All-Star in 1972 while he played with a Prime Tiny.
Sam Lacey was one of the more solid bigmen. So despite playing with an All-Star, Tiny failed. Kobe, AI, McGrady never had the luxury of playing with an all-star in their bad teammate years. He had both of them in 73 as well.

In 1974 he had Jimmy Walker, former 1st pick of the draft who was capable of dropping 20ppg. He was still 29, and was still in All-Star form. He made All-Star team a year before joining Tiny, and hadn't dropped too far.

In 1975 he still had Jimmy Walker, and Sam Lacey. Sam Lacey was an All-Star, and now Top 3 in rebounding, and Top 10 in blocking. Obviously, one of the better big men in the league. Sam Lacey was also known for his defense. Once again, a player that is better than any of these other guys you are talking about played with.

I mean for god sakes, Tiny Archibald played with All-Stars in his prime. And other good players. Does anything more need to be said?

In 1976, he played with Walker, Lacey (who was still a beast), and another All-Star in Weldman. But once again, failure. And next year, failure 22 win season.






Do I need to go further? The fact is, All-Time greats find ways to finish on non-losing teams. Tiny should be no exception. He had All-Star players around him, but his teams had losing records. No other All-Time great has that on their record.

Think of Danny Granger, why doesn't he get as much recognition as Melo? Durant? Because they were on bad teams. Tiny is no exception.

YOu rant and rave about Tiny's prime even on very poor teams he was still able to perform at an all star level more times than KJ .
YOu call him selfish yet he lead the league in assist and for most of his career was a top assist player.
ALso you never want to talk about TIny in 80-81 why is this. Could it be thats the year he played a major role on a championship team something KJ never did
Could it be thats the year he was named 2nd team ALL NBA
Could it be thats the year he was ALL STar Gm MVP something KJ has never done.
TO tell the truthful TIny was hurt most of his prime many players have come into the league a very good players but for most it isnt until there 5 or 6 season that they really are at the top of there game unfourtantly for TIny by his 6th season he was hurt most of the time until 80.
ALso you like making this comparison to Granger and Mello .
NOt sure why you would use these guys to make a case for TIny and KJ
LIke KJ Granger has done little to make a claim for fututer HOF selcetion.
Just face it just because your KJ lover doesnt make him underrated he just fell short of being a HOF Great dont cry many players have that are on his level
Dennis Johnson
Mark Jackson
Timmy Hardaway
Penny Hardaway
Mark Price
Mitch Richmond
Gus Williams
all were as good or better than KJ as in Dennis Johnson's case

[Niquesports]

The coaches that played, the media that reported the game, etc.


Say

Kobe deserves All-D 1st this year
Larry Hughes was once All-D 1st material
Camby was once DPOY material
Bill Russell >> Wilt
Dominique Wilkins and Bob McAdoo are not Top 50 players
DJ is not a HOF


Please tell me you agree with all of that or go f*uck yourself. Because if that is your only argument, then enough said.


Im sure you have had much practice in F***Ing yourself I have read may people saying Mac should be a TOP 50 But I have never read anyone saying KJ should be a TOP 50 many people have even said if Dominique isnt top 50 he is 51 But have never heard read or talked with a drunk that believes KJ belongs on any top 50 list.IF you push me hard enough I could probly name 50 more accomplished guards than KJ it wont be hard since we know for sure he isnt a top 25 guard .

[Showtime]

The fact is that GP uses team success (or lack thereof) as the major reason why Tiny isn't as good as KJ and doesn't belong in the top 10. What he doesn't see is the serious flaws in using team success blindly without context. The suns were successful because they had talent, not because KJ carried the team on his back. The Royals/Kings were not successful because they couldn't compete with their competition, despite the best efforts of a top guard in the league who is in the HOF, selected as one of the top 50 players ever, all star, first teamer, etc. Using team success for comparing individuals is meaningless without context.

[Niquesports]

Just shut the f*uck up now. You are choking on your own words. I don't really talk to backpeddlers who sing different tunes everyday.


How do you like this tune TIny was named a TOP 50 of ALL Time like all but maybe 3
Macado,Dominiaue and Dantley
KJ wasnt and he isnt in the above mentioned group he's more in the top 100 like top 90-100:hammertime:

[Niquesports]

The fact is that GP uses team success (or lack thereof) as the major reason why Tiny isn't as good as KJ and doesn't belong in the top 10. What he doesn't see is the serious flaws in using team success blindly without context. The suns were successful because they had talent, not because KJ carried the team on his back. The Royals/Kings were not successful because they couldn't compete with their competition, despite the best efforts of a top guard in the league who is in the HOF, selected as one of the top 50 players ever, all star, first teamer, etc. Using team success for comparing individuals is meaningless without context.


Showtime even he isnt that dumb. He know Tiny >>>>KJ. ITs just that its sso easy to see that KJ is his favorite player he's also about 20 no more than 25 he just didnt think anyone would call him out on such a stupid comment. He has twisted this a hundred times without dealing with facts
Tiny is a HOF
TIny is a TOP 50
TIny played on a title team
I could go on but you get the point.
Good team or Bad team TIny has done what All Time Greats do get acknowledged by the league at the highest level.
And the best Gp could come back with was KJ is underrated and TIny is overrated and some silly feel good article on KJ
Talk about Lame.

[GP_20]

You never said "KJ did it alone", but you did imply that KJ was far and away the most important player as the basis of your argument. You clearly implied that by stating this:

"In the 4 seasons prior to KJ's first full year in Phoenix, the Suns won 26, 21, 36, and 28 games, missing the playoffs each year. In KJ's first full season, the Suns went from 28-54 to 55-27 and the WCF.

Although he didn't do it alone, he was the most important part of that turnaround in Phoenix. "

You said this AFTER I clearly commented on the talent of those teams. So while you are continuing to point out KJ being important to the suns, that was never the issue. The issue was the talented and deep teams that he had around him which was the reason why they were as successful as they were. This entire discussion was in response to your claim that Tiny is overrated because he didn't carry a team to the playoffs on his own enough times. KJ didn't either. He won with deep and talented teams, which is my point. KJ, while being a top player on the suns, didn't carry a bad team on his back to the playoffs.



That doesn't change the fact that he had a very deep and talented team which was why they were so successful. From his first full season to the arrival of Barkley, he had more than Tiny did during his prime, which is the point. You can't give KJ all the credit because he didn't carry a poor team on his back. He helped a very good team as a top player. Tiny didn't have that luxury, so they can't be compared. You can't give KJ all (or the vast majority) the credit for their success and Tiny all the blame for failure, which is what you are doing in this context of individual impact.



Are you retarded? This entire conversation is about how you said Tiny couldn't carry a team on his back, while KJ was winning. WE ARE DISCUSSING THIS IN THAT CONTEXT. HOW CAN YOU NOT GRASP THIS? You say KJ is superior to Tiny because of Tiny's lack of team success in his prime. So, you are comparing INDIVIDUAL players on TEAM success. Why is this so hard for you to grasp? I'm pointing out a serious flaw in your argument which is this:

You say Tiny didn't carry his team to the playoffs and win enough to be a top 10 pg and rank over KJ. Yet, KJ never carried a low level team on his back either. He may have been arguably the best player on the team at one point, but because of the talent level and depth around him, he didn't have the same circumstances as Tiny. You can't compare the two. KJ didn't carry a lackluster team anywhere. He helped a very good team be even better, and always played with talent around him. That's why I keep saying he didn't do it alone, because you are totally missing the context of YOUR comparison and the flaws in YOUR argument.


I was never arguing in that context. I was arguing in their own team success contexts. In Tiny's team success context, he failed. He could not make a poor team any better. In fact, they got worse.

Team win % of the Royals

1969: 50.0%
1970: 43.9%
Tiny Arrives
1971: 40.2%
Tiny becomes the main player on his team
1972: 36.6%
1973: 43.9%
1974: 40.2%

So in Tiny Archibald's context, his team success was bad. While KJ, obviously he turned around a franchise, not alone, but he led it. In KJ's context, he had good team success. Tiny failed in what he wanted to do (lead that team to the playoffs). While the Suns had a successful season. They went from 28 wins to WCF losing to only the Lakers. Therefore, with respect to their team situation, KJ had better team success. Suns acheived their goals, Royals failed. KJ was the leader of the Suns. Tiny the leader of the Royals. Who should get the most credit/blame for their respective years?





The point is they still had losing records and missed the playoffs, and none of them had as bad of a situation as Tiny over the course of their primes. None. But during the times where they did lose, it proves that top talent can lose on bad teams, which was the point all along.

Imagine Kobe in his 2005-06 situation for a 6 or 7 year span of time. Do you honestly think he could keep up that 2006 level and carry his teams to the playoffs on his back every single year? Of course not. So why does everybody just accept the ups and downs of teams with great players like that but then discard the fact that Tiny's prime was always on a horrible team? Just like some other great players: IT'S NOT THEIR FAULTS THEIR TEAMS DIDN'T WIN. Sometimes a guy can do all he can but it's not enough. Jordan has experienced it. Kareem has experienced it. Kobe has experienced it. Richmond has experienced it. This is something you can't seem to grasp.



THIS IS THE POINT: KOBE HAD AN EXTREMELY SHORT PERIOD SIMILAR TO TINY'S ENTIRE PRIME. Tiny was in Kobe's 2005-06 situation for SIX years. Kobe's situation changed. Jordan's situation changed. Kareem's situation changed. But the fact remains that they proved those situations can stop a team from success no matter who their best player is. Tiny's situation did NOT change. It stayed the same for 6 years. You can't blame him for circumstances out of his control.



Kobe surpassed what Tiny did all his prime in 2-3 years. :hammerhead:
Are you too stupid to realize this? I'm not comparing what happened in 1 year or anything like that. Kareem, Jordan, Kobe, AI, McGrady, they all got it done more than just once in their primes.

I don't see why you are not understanding a simiple point. Like I mean this is just sad. The fact that Tiny had all his prime, but couldn't do what Kobe did in 2-3 years, is a minus point against Tiny. And you have it capitalized like it's a plus point and helps your argument. :oldlol:




You are beyond ignorant. I've already CLEARLY explained how circumstances beyond a player's control, which includes the very best to ever play the game, can hamper a team. I've already CLEARLY explained how circumstances for those players changed, but Tiny's didn't through no fault of his own. There's nothing left to explain if you can't comprehend that. Your argument about team success during Tiny's prime as a reason why he should be ranked below KJ and top 10 = flawed.

Listen, let me say this again. The All-Time greats, regardless of their situations, have non-losing seasons. They make playoffs. Do you understand this? Regardless of their team situation, they do at least that much. Kobe showed he can do it after just 1 year of failure. Tiny failed pretty much all his prime. Furthermore, Tiny actually had 2 different teams and 2 different circumstances therefore. But he still failed.




So wait a minute: Tiny is bad because he was the franchise player on a losing franchise, but a second or third option borderline all star on those same 30 ish win teams are GOOD players? If that's the case, then why do you degrade Tiny? You downplay his reputation during that time as a top guard in the game. You downplay his HOF status. You downplay his top 50 status. All because of his teams' lack of success in his prime. Yet, the second or third option borderline allstars on those SAME 30ish win teams are great players? You are killing your own arguments. If those guys are top players because of their accolades, then Tiny is better than you say he is based upon the same criteria.

It's clear that your own logic kills your own opinion of Tiny. If his teammates aren't downgraded by your same criteria, than neither should Tiny. If he's overrated because his teams lost, then the second and third option borderline all stars should also be overrated and not good enough. It's clear that you can't accept that Tiny's teams in his prime just weren't good enough to compete with the ones in his division, conference, or league. It's clear that you can't grasp how the very best of the best can lose because of their team, but Tiny gets no such pass despite him being in a similar situation for an extended period of time. Just stop please. You are making yourself look foolish.

Once again, you fail to comprehend basic stuff.

I still have Tiny for honorable mentions don't I? I still say he is an All-Star caliber player. I'm not denying that he doesn't belong in the HOF either. I still would say Tiny is a HOF caliber player.

Granger is an All-Star. Harris is an All-Star. I have no problem with them being All-Stars because they are on bad teams. Just like I have no problem with Tiny being in the HOF even though his teams were bad. However, what I would have a problem with is putting Granger over Melo. This is exactly the case here.

I call all All-Star players All-Star caliber playres. I call all NBA players in the HOF, HOF caliber players. However, we are comparing players here. I'm not taking away Tiny's credentials, or even his status as one of the GOAT PGs. I'm comparing him to another player.

If we started arguing Sam Lacey (All-Star) vs. Ben Wallace. I'll take Ben Wallace. I'll use team success as an argument, but I'm not going to say Sam Lacey wasn't an All-Star.

^^^ That should help you understand everything.


So back to my point. Tiny failed to have non-losing seasons despite playing with All-Stars. Things that Kobe, T-Mac, AI, and Jordan didn't have the luxury of playing with in their tough times.

I don't know about you, but if you are an All-Time great, and you are given an All-Star or 2 Borderline All-Star players, you better not have a losing season. And the fact that Tiny was only able to have 1 non-losing season in his prime while playing with decent teammates, gives him no excuses.


Once again, name me another All-Time great who has never had only 1 non-losing season.

[GP_20]

Im sure you have had much practice in F***Ing yourself I have read may people saying Mac should be a TOP 50 But I have never read anyone saying KJ should be a TOP 50 many people have even said if Dominique isnt top 50 he is 51 But have never heard read or talked with a drunk that believes KJ belongs on any top 50 list.IF you push me hard enough I could probly name 50 more accomplished guards than KJ it wont be hard since we know for sure he isnt a top 25 guard .
:roll:
Complete ownage. You had no counter for my argument. What happened to your "Look who is on the Top 50" argument. :oldlol:
What a failure.

btw, many on ISH consider KJ top 50.

[GP_20]

The fact is that GP uses team success (or lack thereof) as the major reason why Tiny isn't as good as KJ and doesn't belong in the top 10. What he doesn't see is the serious flaws in using team success blindly without context. The suns were successful because they had talent, not because KJ carried the team on his back. The Royals/Kings were not successful because they couldn't compete with their competition, despite the best efforts of a top guard in the league who is in the HOF, selected as one of the top 50 players ever, all star, first teamer, etc. Using team success for comparing individuals is meaningless without context.

Once again, I was talking in respect to their team situations obviously. They obviously were on different teams. :hammerhead: But in respect to their situations, KJ did a good job turning that franchise around, while Tiny failed in carrying his team. I'm not saying Tiny's Royals should've posted a record better than KJ's Suns.

With that said, arguments on team success are as follows


1. KJ had better team success in his prime than Tiny.

2. Tiny despite playing with 1-2 All-Star caliber players or Borderline All-Star players in his prime, was only able to have a non-losing season just once.

All the other All-Time greats have been able to do much much much better with weak starcasts. As in they have been able to lead their team to non-losing seasons.

3. No other All-Time great has had only 1 non-losing season in his prime. I'm sorry, but the object of the game is to win and play well. Not just play well. Tiny can't be the only one in NBA history who we can just let him get away with not being able to win games in his prime.






^^^^
THose are just the team success failure arguments for Tiny. There are so many more things against Tiny or Pro KJ that I haven't even named.

[Showtime]

GP = fail to comprehend every counter point of mine. I literally could not explain it any clearer, but you still can't grasp it.

If you want to think KJ ranks higher than Tiny, then fine. I'm no longer going to hit my head against a brick wall.

[GP_20]

GP = fail to comprehend every counter point of mine. I literally could not explain it any clearer, but you still can't grasp it.

If you want to think KJ ranks higher than Tiny, then fine. I'm no longer going to hit my head against a brick wall.
:roll:
That's exactly what I wrote in my posts. That you have failed to comprehend my points. So therefore, your points were never in the right direction to begin with.


By the way, that All-Star argument was just weak. Weak weak weak. Maybe thats why you turned around. Tiny is a HOF. Tiny is this and Tiny is that. Never took any of his credentials away from him even though he was on a bad team. So you better expect me to not take anyway any of his teammate's credentials of All-Star either. Read that paragraph if you still fail to understand.


And try to think before you post. Because that was one of the stupidest things I've ever heard. And you wrote 2 paragraphs on it. Sad man.

[GP_20]

Glove is spot on. He has made some great points in this debate and i think its clear he has won. By the Niquesports, please just stop, all ur arguments are weak and have failed. You remind me of Sir Charles at this point. Saying the same things over and over again.

Thanks. :cheers:

Nice Sir Charles comparison. The guy really has said the same thing over and over, and I even countered that argument with his own argument, yet he totally jumped to another topic. IT was pretty funny. :oldlol:

[GP_20]

Niquesports is getting shred into pieces. LMAO
Yeah it's pretty nasty. But hey does pleezbelieve know this when it is happening to him? No. We are dealing with someone in that caliber.

[Showtime]

:roll:
That's exactly what I wrote in my posts. That you have failed to comprehend my points. So therefore, your points were never in the right direction to begin with.

Fail. I addressed every single point of yours with clear logic and examples which refute your line of reasoning, even going so far as to point out serious flaws in your logic which you totally ignored.


By the way, that All-Star argument was just weak. Weak weak weak. Maybe thats why you turned around. Tiny is a HOF. Tiny is this and Tiny is that. Never took any of his credentials away from him even though he was on a bad team. So you better expect me to not take anyway any of his teammate's credentials of All-Star either. Read that paragraph if you still fail to understand.

No. My point was how flawed your logic is. You downgrade Tiny's all time status in the top 10 because of his lack of team accomplishment, but you don't downgrade his all star teammates. If Tiny is overrated because of 30ish win seasons, than you can't call the second and third options on those exact same teams legitimate talent that was good enough to compete.

Also, your logic about team success is seriously flawed.


And try to think before you post. Because that was one of the stupidest things I've ever heard. And you wrote 2 paragraphs on it. Sad man.

It's not sad to point out a serious flaw in your reasoning. It's not sad to point out how some of the greatest players to ever play have experienced for a SHORT time what Tiny experienced for the DURATION of his prime. Just because those other players' circumstances changed and Tiny's didn't isn't an indictment against Tiny. He had no control over how good his cast was and how competitive his team would be in the league, just like Jordan could only do so much with the Bulls his first few years and how Kobe could only do so much with the Lakers without Shaq. You can keep pointing out how they turned it around and eventually had a winning record, but that doesn't change the fact that it can happen to the best, and they won because their circumstances changed for the better, while Tiny's remained a CONSTANT at the bottom. Tiny experienced 6 seasons of what Kobe experienced for one or two. That's not because Tiny wasn't good enough to improve the team, it's because the cast around him never improved enough to remain competitive. Just like MJ's early days, they just weren't good enough no matter what he did.

But like I said, think what you want. No amount of logic is going to change your mind, obviously.

[GP_20]

Fail. I addressed every single point of yours with clear logic and examples which refute your line of reasoning, even going so far as to point out serious flaws in your logic which you totally ignored.

Actually no you didn't. You did not interpret my definition of Team Success right, how deep KJ's teams were had nothing to do with the team success I was talking about of Tiny's. Yet that was your main point. Furthermore, you kept saying that I'm saying KJ did it "ALONE". Yet I never said that either or ever meant that.

False interpretations. You never had the right idea.



No. My point was how flawed your logic is. You downgrade Tiny's all time status in the top 10 because of his lack of team accomplishment, but you don't downgrade his all star teammates. If Tiny is overrated because of 30ish win seasons, than you can't call the second and third options on those exact same teams legitimate talent that was good enough to compete.

But is anyone overrating his All-Star teammates? God are you seriously this dense? Is someone comparing Lackey to Ben Wallace? Because then I'll use the team success argument. Otherwise, Lackey is an All-Star, and that's it.

And that's all I said. Tiny is a HOF. Lackey is an All-Star. That's the only argument I used. And I'm not downgrading Tiny's HOF status, so then why the f*uck do you expect me to downgrade Lackey's All-Star status?

Besides, I'm not making Lackey anything more than an All-Star to start out with. Saying Tiny is Top 10 PG is more than saying he is a HOF. Is there a reason I have to downgrade Lackey to something worse than an All-Star when I've never done this with ANY All-Star in the history of the game. (No matter how bad their teammates are) All All-Star players to me are All-Star caliber. Did you get that? HOF players are HOF caliber to me. All of them. Tiny too despite his bad team success.

Showtime, so do you have a point? Read what I just wrote again if you have any doubts. Even a toddler can see more than you.



It's not sad to point out a serious flaw in your reasoning. It's not sad to point out how some of the greatest players to ever play have experienced for a SHORT time what Tiny experienced for the DURATION of his prime. Just because those other players' circumstances changed and Tiny's didn't isn't an indictment against Tiny. He had no control over how good his cast was and how competitive his team would be in the league, just like Jordan could only do so much with the Bulls his first few years and how Kobe could only do so much with the Lakers without Shaq. You can keep pointing out how they turned it around, but that's because their circumstances changed for the better, while Tiny's remained a CONSTANT at the bottom.

But like I said, think what you want. No amount of logic is going to change your mind, obviously.

But the thing is, those greatest players in their short time were able to do more than Tiny did in his whole prime with weak teams.

And you think that makes Tiny's case stronger? :roll:





Logic 101
Take that class please.

[Showtime]

Blah blah...another member added to my ignore list. Have fun BS'ing other people with your flawed logic, condescending arrogance, and total lack of reading comprehension. I think you actually enjoy reading your own posts rather than responding to others. Good day to you sir.

[GP_20]

Blah blah...another member added to my ignore list. Have fun BS'ing other people with your flawed logic, condescending arrogance, and total lack of reading comprehension. I think you actually enjoy reading your own posts rather than responding to others. Good day to you sir.
Another member to my Owned list


It's long so you don't stand out. But people who can't understand a simple point like it's worst to lose almost all your prime than just 1-2 years, don't even deserve to post on ISH. (Yes thats it) And ISH has low standards.


I look at that All-Star degrading argument of yours, and it makes me laugh ever ytime. So anytime I'm having a bad day, I'll just read some of your posts Showtime, that will quickly help turn things around.

[Niquesports]

I was never arguing in that context. I was arguing in their own team success contexts. In Tiny's team success context, he failed. He could not make a poor team any better. In fact, they got worse.

Team win % of the Royals

1969: 50.0%
1970: 43.9%
Tiny Arrives
1971: 40.2%
Tiny becomes the main player on his team
1972: 36.6%
1973: 43.9%
1974: 40.2%

Why did you fail to mention that in 73-74- Tiny only played 35 gm. and that in 74-75 Tiny leads team to first winning record since 1966 while leading team to playoffs.

So in Tiny Archibald's context, his team success was bad. While KJ, obviously he turned around a franchise, not alone, but he led it. In KJ's context, he had good team success. Tiny failed in what he wanted to do (lead that team to the playoffs)
He did lead his team to the playoffs in 74-75 dont you look things up before you type them

. While the Suns had a successful season. They went from 28 wins to WCF losing to only the Lakers. Therefore, with respect to their team situation, KJ had better team success. Suns acheived their goals, Royals failed. KJ was the leader of the Suns. Tiny the leader of the Royals. Who should get the most credit/blame for their respective years?

The SUNS front office thats who cause the Royals/Kings were as bad as the Clippers in those days but of course you wouldnt know this you were still in daddys NUt sack




Kobe surpassed what Tiny did all his prime in 2-3 years. :hammerhead:
Are you too stupid to realize this? I'm not comparing what happened in 1 year or anything like that. Kareem, Jordan, Kobe, AI, McGrady, they all got it done more than just once in their primes.

IF your calling Tiny's prime his first six years you are stupid no one ever put Tiny in the likes of Magic,Jordan,Kareem his first few years he was outstanding but he got hurt when he was really about to explode you are so stuck on trying to make a point on his years with Cinn/KC you even pulled up and tried to compare him to Granger has Granger ever made first Team All NBA ? So no comparison.

I don't see why you are not understanding a simiple point. Like I mean this is just sad. The fact that Tiny had all his prime, but couldn't do what Kobe did in 2-3 years, is a minus point against Tiny. And you have it capitalized like it's a plus point and helps your argument. :oldlol:




Listen, let me say this again. The All-Time greats, regardless of their situations, have non-losing seasons. They make playoffs. Do you understand this? Regardless of their team situation, they do at least that much. Kobe showed he can do it after just 1 year of failure. Tiny failed pretty much all his prime. Furthermore, Tiny actually had 2 different teams and 2 different circumstances therefore. But he still failed.
Can you name the two differnt teams ? THe NEts oh he was hurt most of the time with them or the Braves how many games did he play with them or maybe your talking about the Celtics oh cant be he won a title with them.
Once again, you fail to comprehend basic stuff.

That would be you we have gone from who the better player was which you lost badly to who had better team sucess without acknowledging that Tiny was on a team similuar to todays OKC.

I still have Tiny for honorable mentions don't I? I still say he is an All-Star caliber player. I'm not denying that he doesn't belong in the HOF either. I still would say Tiny is a HOF caliber player.

Granger is an All-Star. Harris is an All-Star. I have no problem with them being All-Stars because they are on bad teams. Just like I have no problem with Tiny being in the HOF even though his teams were bad. However, what I would have a problem with is putting Granger over Melo. This is exactly the case here.



No it isnt because Granger isnt a HOF caliber player and KJ isnt a Mello caliber player

I call all All-Star players All-Star caliber playres. I call all NBA players in the HOF, HOF caliber players. However, we are comparing players here. I'm not taking away Tiny's credentials, or even his status as one of the GOAT PGs. I'm comparing him to another player.

If we started arguing Sam Lacey (All-Star) vs. Ben Wallace. I'll take Ben Wallace. I'll use team success as an argument, but I'm not going to say Sam Lacey wasn't an All-Star.

^^^ That should help you understand everything.


So back to my point. Tiny failed to have non-losing seasons despite playing with All-Stars. Things that Kobe, T-Mac, AI, and Jordan didn't have the luxury of playing with in their tough times.

I don't know about you, but if you are an All-Time great, and you are given an All-Star or 2 Borderline All-Star players, you better not have a losing season. And the fact that Tiny was only able to have 1 non-losing season in his prime while playing with decent teammates, gives him no excuses.


Once again, name me another All-Time great who has never had only 1 non-losing season.

SO Since Tiny's time in Boston you want to not talk about and you now want to make the Cinn/KC team into a decent support cast I see you have admit defeat in who was the better player. It took 3 days but you finally got it.
IF you want to say in Tiny first 3 years he was unable to lead a very poor team to the playoffs your right . IF you want to admit he was able to lead that same poor team to its first winning season in Nine years well give him due for that then.

LEt me help you understand in the early 70's there were only like (this is off the top of my head so dont try and think you got me) 8 teams in each DIv. So think of it like this Chirs Paul would be a good example of TIny in his early years say the HOrnetsonly played this years Playoff teams for the 82 games do you really think W/Paul the Hornets win more than 40 gm? Also do you really think the Hornets are a top 5 team out of the 8 playoff teams in the West. NO they wouldnt be so in that case Paul misses playoffs does that make Paul any less of a player because of this ?
NO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It just means that the
Lakers
Nuggets
Rockets
Trailblazers
Spurs
Mavs
are better than the Hornets.
Does this help you I tried and do it real slow.

[GP_20]

SO Since Tiny's time in Boston you want to not talk about and you now want to make the Cinn/KC team into a decent support cast I see you have admit defeat in who was the better player. It took 3 days but you finally got it.
IF you want to say in Tiny first 3 years he was unable to lead a very poor team to the playoffs your right . IF you want to admit he was able to lead that same poor team to its first winning season in Nine years well give him due for that then.

LEt me help you understand in the early 70's there were only like (this is off the top of my head so dont try and think you got me) 8 teams in each DIv. So think of it like this Chirs Paul would be a good example of TIny in his early years say the HOrnetsonly played this years Playoff teams for the 82 games do you really think W/Paul the Hornets win more than 40 gm? Also do you really think the Hornets are a top 5 team out of the 8 playoff teams in the West. NO they wouldnt be so in that case Paul misses playoffs does that make Paul any less of a player because of this ?
NO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It just means that the
Lakers
Nuggets
Rockets
Trailblazers
Spurs
Mavs
are better than the Hornets.
Does this help you I tried and do it real slow.

Who is talking playoffs here? The quote you are quoting is talking non-losing seasons idiot.

Another failure.



Hey Niquesports quick question, why are posters saying that I've owned you, won the debate, was right on all my points, and that you've been shredded.

Why are they saying this? They say this to posters like BULLS, Pleezebelieve, BruceBlitz, etc. Why are you in that group? I mean, I'm not even that liked around here, and posts like that still come. Maybe they are saying that based on my posts?


Face the reality kid, you are pathetic.

[Niquesports]

:roll:
Complete ownage. You had no counter for my argument. What happened to your "Look who is on the Top 50" argument. :oldlol:
What a failure.

btw, many on ISH consider KJ top 50.


Do they have air on the planet you live on your argument was stupid. KJ had better team sucess KJ was quciker,KJ was a better shooter , but because KJ aint get no rec. by the league its because he is underrated
Talk about failure:hammerhead:

Then this fool comes back and says many on ISH consider KJ a top 50
:roll:
Yea Im sure KJ feels relived and redeemed by the league dissing him because the knowledgeable 15-20 year olds like you think he's a top 50 but the players that he played with dont and the media that covered him dont and the coaches that coached against him dont but KJ can keep his head up ISH grat basketball minds do, the same people that rate David Robinson over Bill Russell and have Elgin Baylor behind Scottie Pippen
:roll:

Im KIcking your A**
THis is so FUN

[Niquesports]

Who is talking playoffs here? The quote you are quoting is talking non-losing seasons idiot.

Another failure.



Hey Niquesports quick question, why are posters saying that I've owned you, won the debate, was right on all my points, and that you've been shredded.

Why are they saying this? They say this to posters like BULLS, Pleezebelieve, BruceBlitz, etc. Why are you in that group? I mean, I'm not even that liked around here, and posts like that still come. Maybe they are saying that based on my posts?


Face the reality kid, you are pathetic.

Go back and read DUmmy many have taken my side.
Your Post is stupid Dummy
YOu say KJ was better than TIny
I say the league voters dont think so
YOu say well I think Tiny is overrated and many ISH people think KJ is TOp 50
I tell you what you feel good that ISH people support you
and I'll feel good that people that have first hand experience and are directly involed with the league support me.
Well Dummy are you happy
Hey kid in your world the land of the ISh maybe I am but here on Earth we call your kind

DUMMY

[GP_20]

Go back and read DUmmy many have taken my side.
Your Post is stupid Dummy
YOu say KJ was better than TIny
I say the league voters dont think so
YOu say well I think Tiny is overrated and many ISH people think KJ is TOp 50
I tell you what you feel good that ISH people support you
and I'll feel good that people that have first hand experience and are directly involed with the league support me.
Well Dummy are you happy
Hey kid in your world the land of the ISh maybe I am but here on Earth we call your kind

DUMMY
:roll: :roll: :roll:


i skimmed over all of this Tiny vs. KJ debate, and Glove has made lots of good points about KJ, and his argument is stronger. I would've ranked Tiny higher earlier, but after finding out he has made playoffs just once in his prime, I have changed my mind. I mean that is inexcusable.

glove got the better of this debate, you just got owned just right now with that article Glove posted. Glove does it again with another great rankings thread, good stuff :applause:


Glove is spot on. He has made some great points in this debate and i think its clear he has won. By the Niquesports, please just stop, all ur arguments are weak and have failed. You remind me of Sir Charles at this point. Saying the same things over and over again.


Niquesports is getting shred into pieces. LMAO



Now I want you to show me where people have said Niquesports "good points" or Niquesports you have won or Niquesports anything.

:roll:

Even pleezebelieve isn't this dumb

[Niquesports]

:roll: :roll: :roll:









Now I want you to show me where people have said Niquesports "good points" or Niquesports you have won or Niquesports anything.

:roll:

Even pleezebelieve isn't this dumb


Hey Dummy it all start you said
KJ>>>> TINy
I said TIny >>>> KJ
SO to prove my point I used the league to support my arument you used
Chitownsfinest
basketball4life
skywalker

This is who supports me
Voters for the 50 Greatest Players in NBA History




Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (player), Marv Albert (media), Al Attles (team), Red Auerbach (team), Elgin Baylor (team), Dave Bing (player), Larry Bird (team), Marty Blake (team), Fran Blinebury (media), Bill Bradley (player), Hubie Brown (team), Wilt Chamberlain (player), Mitch Chortkoff (media), Bob Cousy (player), Billy Cunningham (team), Chuck Daly (team), David DuPree (media), Wayne Embry (team), Julius Erving (player), Joe Gilmartin (media), Sam Goldaper (media), Alex Hannum (team), Lester Harrison (team), John Havlicek (player), Chick Hearn (media), Red Holzman (team), Phil Jasner (media), Earvin Johnson (player), John Kerr (player), Leonard Koppet (media), Bob Lanier (player), Frank Layden (team), Leonard Lewin (media), Jack McCallum (media), Dick McGuire (team), George Mikan (player), Bob Pettit (player), Harvey Pollack (team), Jack Ramsay (team), Willis Reed (team), Oscar Robertson (player), Bill Russell (player), Bob Ryan (media), Dolph Schayes (player), Bill Sharman (player), Gene Shue (team), Isiah Thomas (team), Wes Unseld (team), Peter Vecsey (media), Jerry West (team)


Do you know any of these guys

Im kicking your a** DUMMY
KIcking your AZZ
YOu Big Dummy

[GP_20]

Hey Dummy it all start you said
KJ>>>> TINy
I said TIny >>>> KJ
SO to prove my point I used the league to support my arument you used
Chitownsfinest
basketball4life
skywalker

This is who supports me
Voters for the 50 Greatest Players in NBA History




Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (player), Marv Albert (media), Al Attles (team), Red Auerbach (team), Elgin Baylor (team), Dave Bing (player), Larry Bird (team), Marty Blake (team), Fran Blinebury (media), Bill Bradley (player), Hubie Brown (team), Wilt Chamberlain (player), Mitch Chortkoff (media), Bob Cousy (player), Billy Cunningham (team), Chuck Daly (team), David DuPree (media), Wayne Embry (team), Julius Erving (player), Joe Gilmartin (media), Sam Goldaper (media), Alex Hannum (team), Lester Harrison (team), John Havlicek (player), Chick Hearn (media), Red Holzman (team), Phil Jasner (media), Earvin Johnson (player), John Kerr (player), Leonard Koppet (media), Bob Lanier (player), Frank Layden (team), Leonard Lewin (media), Jack McCallum (media), Dick McGuire (team), George Mikan (player), Bob Pettit (player), Harvey Pollack (team), Jack Ramsay (team), Willis Reed (team), Oscar Robertson (player), Bill Russell (player), Bob Ryan (media), Dolph Schayes (player), Bill Sharman (player), Gene Shue (team), Isiah Thomas (team), Wes Unseld (team), Peter Vecsey (media), Jerry West (team)


Do you know any of these guys

Im kicking your a** DUMMY
KIcking your AZZ
YOu Big Dummy


No actually those 3 posters have read your "Top 50" argument and they've watched me counter it, and then they've posted those remarks. Here you want me to do it again



Is Dominque Wilkins worse than all The Top 50 members?
Is Bob McAdoo worse than all the Top 50 memebers?
Does Kobe deserve All-D 1st this year?
Did Larry Hughes deserve All-D 1st ever?
Did Camby deserve DPOY ever?
Does DJ not deserve HOF?

If you answer NO to any of those, you officially fail........again

[bizil]

Tiny Archibald has become one of the most overrated players in NBA history. Sad to see. And people just li.st him as Top 10 without really arguing why


Well let me ask you this who would you put in his place on my list? KJ hell no! KJ had the potential to be but injuries cost him. Mark Price? Lenny Wilkens? Tiny revolutionized the game with the ability to score at will at his size and drop dimes. It's not at all out of the realm of possibility for Tiny to be in the top 10 PG's of all time. If you don't agree then cool. But for u to call him overrated is crazy. Isiah, AI, Paul, Hardaway, and KJ all have a little Tiny in them. Before Tiny usually points around that size were like Cousy. Tiny gave u the dimes along with the scoring. And even when he slowed down he helped Bird get a ring. Ask Bird if Tiny is a top ten point. Bird will say that's a dumb question of course he is. You can't knock a dude who revolutinized a position in his own way.

[JustinJDW]

By the end of Tony Parker's Career, he should be Top 10. 3 Rings and a Finals MVP are more than Steve Nash and Jason Kidd ever came near accomplishing.

[sbw19]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/dailydime?page=dailydime-GreatestPointGuards

Yawn.

[Norcaliblunt]

Glove is owning these fools Nique and Showtime. Damn good points there dude.

[Norcaliblunt]

By the end of Tony Parker's Career, he should be Top 10. 3 Rings and a Finals MVP are more than Steve Nash and Jason Kidd ever came near accomplishing.

3 rings and a finals MVP all riding the coattails of arguably one of the best players of this generation. Give me break. You don't think if you put Kidd or Nash on those teams with Duncan you don't get the same results. Christ they might even accomplish more? Especially a Kidd and Duncan combo.

[JustinJDW]

3 rings and a finals MVP all riding the coattails of arguably one of the best players of this generation. Give me break. You don't think if you put Kidd or Nash on those teams with Duncan you don't get the same results. Christ they might even accomplish more? Especially a Kidd and Duncan combo.Coattails?!?! Are you ****ing kidding me? You must have not seen the 2007 Finals. Better yet, you must have not seen him play throughout his career at all.

:oldlol:

[Niquesports]

No actually those 3 posters have read your "Top 50" argument and they've watched me counter it, and then they've posted those remarks. Here you want me to do it again



Is Dominque Wilkins worse than all The Top 50 members?
Is Bob McAdoo worse than all the Top 50 memebers?
Does Kobe deserve All-D 1st this year?
Did Larry Hughes deserve All-D 1st ever?
Did Camby deserve DPOY ever?
Does DJ not deserve HOF?

If you answer NO to any of those, you officially fail........again


IT amazes me how silly you can get and how off topic you try and go to try and safe face.
All selections are open to debate but I put more in stock in the opinions of players that played the game coaches that coached the game and media guys that are paid and have inside information as well as personal dialog with the games players,coaches,GM's and owners than some silly kid's opinion that believes real basketball started with Jordan.

How much A** kicking are you gonna take.
Big Dummy.

As far as DJ yes I believe he deserves to be in the HOF he has both performance and team success much more than KJ

Try again BIG DUMMY

[Niquesports]

Glove is owning these fools Nique and Showtime. Damn good points there dude.


Can you tell me one of his good points??
LIL Dummy.

Could one of his point be that KJ had better team success?
Could one of his point be that TIny is overrated?
Could one of his points be that KJ is underrated ?
Could it be that Tiny in his prime only made 1 playoff series ?

Please answer one of these So I can shut you down also.
Because all are not points just reading into things he or you know nothing about.

[Niquesports]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/dailydime?page=dailydime-GreatestPointGuards

Yawn.


Dang another list of "experts" that dont even give KJ 1 vote.

Hey GP I guess this list is wrong also these guys dont know what there talking about.
YOu BIG DUMMY

[GP_20]

Glove is owning these fools Nique and Showtime. Damn good points there dude.
Thanks Man

I only really care what 3rd parties think. Niquesports is just like pleezebelieve, he isn't going to understand a thing. Let him talk. Just like we let pleezebelieve talk. I've totally killed all his arguments yet he doesn't get it.

Niquesports, my reaction to you, and all the other posters reaction to you, and your reaction to yourself...is just like how pleezebelieve reacts.

Everyone tells him he is getting owned, he is the only one who thinks otherwise.

[GP_20]

IT amazes me how silly you can get and how off topic you try and go to try and safe face.
All selections are open to debate but I put more in stock in the opinions of players that played the game coaches that coached the game and media guys that are paid and have inside information as well as personal dialog with the games players,coaches,GM's and owners than some silly kid's opinion that believes real basketball started with Jordan.

How much A** kicking are you gonna take.
Big Dummy.

As far as DJ yes I believe he deserves to be in the HOF he has both performance and team success much more than KJ

Try again BIG DUMMY

Here let me dumb it down for you even more


Your only argument is "Tiny is a Top 50 player and a HOF, KJ is not, therefore Tiny > KJ"

I named you other deserving Top 50 players and HOFs that aren't there. I asked if you think the ones already in Top 50 and HOF are better than those. You had no answer.

Therefore, your Top 50/HOF argument is weak and invalid. And there is more to it than being Top 50 or in the HOF. Now do you get it? Man you are slow.

[Showtime]

Glove is owning these fools Nique and Showtime. Damn good points there dude.

lol I've countered his "winning" argument several times, yet he can't comprehend what I'm trying to point out. He uses team success as a reason why Tiny is overrated and KJ is better. What he can't comprehend is that factors OUTSIDE THEIR CONTROL factored into team success, so you can't judge the individual on factors they can't control.

Example: like Jordan's first few years with the Bulls, Tiny's teams weren't good enough to compete with the opposition. Why? In both cases, is it because Jordan and Tiny didn't play well enough? Is it because Jordan's play was so inadequate that it resulted in losing seasons and no playoffs? Is that his fault? No. Then why did they lose? Because they didn't have enough talent on their teams to be competitive. Those circumstances created a situation where, DESPITE THE BEST EFFORTS OF JORDAN AND THROUGH NO FAULT OF HIS OWN, his team wasn't competitive. Same with Tiny, only that situation didn't improve. He dealt with personal family issues, injury, etc all while his team stayed poor and didn't acquire enough talent. Let me say that again: Circumstances outside his control lead to a situation where, despite his best efforts, his team wasn't good enough to compete. That's the flaw in using team success without context. You shouldn't judge the individual on things they cannot control. KJ is not superior to Tiny because the suns went on playoff runs and the Royals/Kings did not.

Ask yourself this question: did the bulls have a losing record because of some fault of Jordan's? Was there some inadequacy in him or insufficient play that resulted in the bulls not having a winning record and not getting to the playoffs his rookie season? If the answer is no, then there shouldn't be any double standard with Tiny.

[GP_20]

lol I've countered his "winning" argument several times, yet he can't comprehend what I'm trying to point out. He uses team success as a reason why Tiny is overrated and KJ is better. What he can't comprehend is that factors OUTSIDE THEIR CONTROL factored into team success, so you can't judge the individual on factors they can't control.

Example: like Jordan's first few years with the Bulls, Tiny's teams weren't good enough to compete with the opposition. Why? In both cases, is it because Jordan and Tiny didn't play well enough? Is it because Jordan's play was so inadequate that it resulted in losing seasons and no playoffs? Is that his fault? No. Then why did they lose? Because they didn't have enough talent on their teams to be competitive. Those circumstances created a situation where, DESPITE THE BEST EFFORTS OF JORDAN AND THROUGH NO FAULT OF HIS OWN, his team wasn't competitive. Same with Tiny, only that situation didn't improve. He dealt with personal family issues, injury, etc all while his team stayed poor and didn't acquire enough talent. Let me say that again: Circumstances outside his control lead to a situation where, despite his best efforts, his team wasn't good enough to compete. That's the flaw in using team success without context. You shouldn't judge the individual on things they cannot control. KJ is not superior to Tiny because the suns went on playoff runs and the Royals/Kings did not.

Jordan got it done. Kobe got it done. T-Mac got it done. Iverson got it done. etc. etc. etc. They all got it done without any All-Stars. They showed it's possible to lead a team without much talent to the playoffs if you are good enogh.


Tiny Archibald, the well deserved HOF (no degrading ANYONE's credentials), played with 1 All-Star or 2 borderline All-Stars in many years and didn't get it done. Only once in his prime did he have a non-losing season.


And I think posters see this now. Also, you are totally missing the 2nd big factor Team success impacts. One is of course, team success it self. The 2nd one I haven't talked about since earlier in the thread.

[bizil]

Jordan got it done. Kobe got it done. T-Mac got it done. Iverson got it done. etc. etc. etc. They all got it done without any All-Stars. They showed it's possible to lead a team without much talent to the playoffs if you are good enogh.


Tiny Archibald, the well deserved HOF (no degrading ANYONE's credentials), played with 1 All-Star or 2 borderline All-Stars in many years and didn't get it done. Only once in his prime did he have a non-losing season.


And I think posters see this now. Also, you are totally missing the 2nd big factor Team success impacts. One is of course, team success it self. The 2nd one I haven't talked about since earlier in the thread.


Well truth be told AI, T-Mac, MJ, and Kobe are better than Tiny. Plus Tiny was ballin in an era where his teams weren't as good as a lot of others. You still had the Knicks, Spurs, Bullets, Celtics, Lakers, Portland, and Philly that had WAY MORE STACKED TEAMS! Tiny might have had a couple of All-Star players. But his teams couldn't compare to some of those other teams. If you think Tiny isn't a 8-10 PG of all time that's your opinion. But if he aint in the top 10 then he's no worse than 11-13. If you are in that range then most likely you are arguably a top ten caliber all time PG anyway.

[Niquesports]

Here let me dumb it down for you even more


Your only argument is "Tiny is a Top 50 player and a HOF, KJ is not, therefore Tiny > KJ"

I named you other deserving Top 50 players and HOFs that aren't there. I asked if you think the ones already in Top 50 and HOF are better than those. You had no answer.

Therefore, your Top 50/HOF argument is weak and invalid. And there is more to it than being Top 50 or in the HOF. Now do you get it? Man you are slow.


Oh now I get it
Its just as important to be considered a All Time great as it is to get voted in to the HOF and named a TOp 50 your opinion means so much and is way more respected than others. Your so bright
DUMB AZZ
Your only argument was that TIny had bad team success in his prime
You consider part of his prime his rookie season but only count KJ's prime when he got to the SUns why not count his rookie season also you the when he was rinding the pine for the Cavs something Tiny never did. YOu name a few people that agree with your Dumb Azz and you think your on to something News Flash maybe ther just as Dumb as you ever think about that.
Lets look at it one more time

Number of times named First team All NBA Tiny 3 KJ never
Number of times lead the league in scoring TIny 1 KJ never
Number of times name MVP of ALL Star Game Tiny 1 KJ never
Selected into HOF Tiny yes KJ NO
Named NBA TOp 50 TIny yes KJ NO
Played major role on a title team Tiny Yes KJ NEVER
Lead league in Assist Tiny yes KJ NO
Maybe there are about 5 guys that should have made the top 50 like
Mac,Dominique,Dantley its just KJ isnt one of them

Im KICKING your AZZ
Dummy
By the way if you read all the post just as many agree with me as agree with you so maybe your the one thats CRazy
DUmmy

[Niquesports]

Jordan got it done. Kobe got it done. T-Mac got it done. Iverson got it done. etc. etc. etc. They all got it done without any All-Stars. They showed it's possible to lead a team without much talent to the playoffs if you are good enogh.


Tiny Archibald, the well deserved HOF (no degrading ANYONE's credentials), played with 1 All-Star or 2 borderline All-Stars in many years and didn't get it done. Only once in his prime did he have a non-losing season.


And I think posters see this now. Also, you are totally missing the 2nd big factor Team success impacts. One is of course, team success it self. The 2nd one I haven't talked about since earlier in the thread.


This is a perfect example of people that think basketball began with Jordan.
idots like this fool have no understanding that in the 70's only the top 4 team smade the playoffs unlike today when it seems like every team makes it.
Example does anyone think the Hornets are one of the top 4 teams in the West if not then does that mean Chris Paul fall short on team success or does it just mean that the Lakers,Nuggets,Spurs,Rockets,Mavs are just better "TEAMS" . Let me give you an example you say why cant a great player get his team into the playoffs lets see what some other great players did lets say in 72-73 Tiny's wonderful season.

CLev misses playoffs with
Lenny Wikins and Austin Carr

Detroit Missess playoffs with
Bob Lanier
Dave Bing

Golden State misses playoffs with
RIck Barry
Nate Thurmond
Jeff Mullins
Cazzie Russell

The Suns miss playoffs with
Charlie Scott
Neal Walk
Connie Hawkins
Dick Van Arsdale (the better of the Van Arsdale brothers)

KNow I know its hard for you and your other new to basketball fans to understand but inthe 70's it took an elite team to make the playoffs unlike today when only the weak of the weak fail to make the playoffs.

YOu asked me what other great failed to lead his team to the playoffs iin his prime
How about Dave Bing and Pistol Pete sure when Pete came to a playoff Atlanta team but as soon as he took over as team leading scorer and was traded which would be his prime he failed to make the playoffs

Down Goes GP Down Goes GP
BIG DUMMY

[GP_20]

I can't even laugh anymore. I didn't think it was possible for someone to be this stupid till I met Niquesports. Is this pleezbelieve's alias?


1st Post: There are more holes in that post than sentences. I don't think I even need to reply. Better idea, just read it again and delete it yourself.

2nd Post: We are talking non-losing seasons, playoffs isn't necessary. I've said this now 15 times. You still don't get it. I can't help you. Non-losing seasons. NOT playoffs.


Oh by the way, no one has said Niquesports good point ,etc. How many have said Niquesports you are stupid and are getting owned by Glove, or good points Glove.

This is not rocket science man. When everyone has said you are getting owned, then you are getting owned. We aren't crazy, you are.

[Sir Charles]

1-Magic
2-Stockton
3-Fraizer
4-Payton
5-Isiah

Ther rest is debatable but

I think Big O was more of a SG-Combo and MAravich too but that alone If they played the Point Purely they would probably be right up there and so would Pippen even the he was your typical Point Forward, and yes Best Perimeter Defender of All Time

Algo I THink KJ in his prime was around a Top 10 All TIme SG

[Niquesports]

I can't even laugh anymore. I didn't think it was possible for someone to be this stupid till I met Niquesports. Is this pleezbelieve's alias?


1st Post: There are more holes in that post than sentences. I don't think I even need to reply. Better idea, just read it again and delete it yourself.

2nd Post: We are talking non-losing seasons, playoffs isn't necessary. I've said this now 15 times. You still don't get it. I can't help you. Non-losing seasons. NOT playoffs.


Oh by the way, no one has said Niquesports good point ,etc. How many have said Niquesports you are stupid and are getting owned by Glove, or good points Glove.

This is not rocket science man. When everyone has said you are getting owned, then you are getting owned. We aren't crazy, you are.

Why dont you take the time to look back and see just how many people have disageed with you about KJ>Tiny but I understand just like your blind to anything someone shows you you only read post that support you.
Just like a DUmmy