Who was the more underrated player; Nate Thurmond or Artis Gilmore?

[Manute for Ever!]

Artis Gilmore
-ABA All-Time Team (1997)
-ABA MVP (1972)
-ABA Rookie of the Year (1972)
-5x ABA All-Star (1972-76)
-5x All-ABA First Team (1972-76)
-5x ABA All-Defensive First Team (1972-76)
-ABA All-Star Game MVP (1974)
-ABA Playoff MVP (1975)
-6x NBA All-Star (1978, 1979, 1981-83, 1986)
-1x NBA All-Defensive Second Team (1978)
-NBA career leader in field goal percentage (.599)

ABA Averages: 22.3ppg 17.1rpg
NBA Averages: 17.1ppg 10.1rpg

Best resume of any player not in the Hall of Fame, hasn't received a single vote in the last three years.

Nate Thurmond
-Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame (1985)
-2

[Maniak]

Ignoring the "weak era" and "kobe is jesus" comments from trolls, this is an interesting discussion.

I like Artis Gilmore here, although Ive never seen either of them play, he puts up very nice numberz and has a very nice resume, its sad he isnt in the HOF because he had a very nice ABA career.

[L.Kizzle]

Nate Thurmond is the slightly better player while Artis Gilmore is the more underrated player.

[RainierBeachPoet]

since nate made the HOF, seems like artis is the more underrated. at ish, nate is more underrated because fewer people here actually saw him

personal note: when i was a kid watching the warrior's games, nate as well as clifford ray used to scare the sh!t out of me-- they both looked like they could take slick watt's head off when he went down the lane!!

[inclinerator]

artis gilmore i hardly even heard of him

[Showtime]

artis gilmore i hardly even heard of him
http://www.mixmakers.net/forums/nba-basketball/149453-forgotten-greats-artis-train-gilmore.html#post1444569

[momo]

ABA guys often get slighted or ignored entirely. So I would say Gil.

Not in the hall.

[Manute for Ever!]

When there was a thread a few weeks ago where we picked the all-time starting line-up for our favourite teams, I was the only Bulls fan to pick Gilmore at centre. Most people had Bill Cartwright or Horace Grant playing out of position over a guy who shot .599 from the field for his career and averaged a double-double.

[Rake2204]

When there was a thread a few weeks ago where we picked the all-time starting line-up for our favourite teams, I was the only Bulls fan to pick Gilmore at centre. Most people had Bill Cartwright or Horace Grant playing out of position over a guy who shot .599 from the field for his career and averaged a double-double.
Wow. I didn't think he was THAT underrated. That's quite an oversight. In combination with that fact alongside the fact he has not found his way into the Hall of Fame, it would appear that Gilmore is the most underrated of the two.

However, from a personal standpoint, Gilmore comes to mind much more often than Thurmond, in spite of the fact that oftentimes one reminds me of the other. I've decided I think of Gilmore though because he had a more memorable appearance. With the basketball Hall of Fame not catering to just one league (and thus including the ABA) I feel Gilmore should get a HOF nod.

[icemanfan]

Nate Thurmond is the slightly better player while Artis Gilmore is the more underrated player.
Wow that is 100% accurate. A good thread with good responce in a sea of endless troll driven filth. Very nice!


Ice

[Manute for Ever!]

I still love this Gilmore picture, I wish I could get it as a poster

http://hoopedia.nba.com/images/5/51/GilmoreJacksville.jpg

[Manute for Ever!]

Wow that is 100% accurate. A good thread with good responce in a sea of endless troll driven filth. Very nice!


Ice

:cheers: Cheers mate and good to have you back.

[Doranku]

Ignoring the "weak era" and "kobe is jesus" comments from trolls, this is an interesting discussion.

I like Artis Gilmore here, although Ive never seen either of them play, he puts up very nice numberz and has a very nice resume, its sad he isnt in the HOF because he had a very nice ABA career.

Kobe is Jesus. Just for you c0cksucker, since you insecure haters are the ones that always bring it up. :lol

Anyway, the answer to the OP is Artis Gilmore. I've seen Nate Thurmond receive his dues numerous times. Gil? Some people don't even know who the dude is, and it's quite sad to be honest.

[jongib369]

*bump

[Smoke117]

Artis Gilmore isn't in the HoF...wtf? :biggums:

[jongib369]

Artis Gilmore isn't in the HoF...wtf? :biggums:
He was inducted in 2011, but it's insane it took that long.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1xqwh7PE4I

Starting a team I really don't know who I'd go with...But I think Gilmore was more underrated to answer the OP

[Height Freak]

Nate is Perhaps slightly more underrated.

[Legends66NBA7]

Artis Gilmore no doubt.

Who is the better Bull at their best, Gilmore or Noah ?

[La Frescobaldi]

Nate is Perhaps slightly more underrated.

2 all time greats tho lot of slamming and jamming back then!!

A-Train and Dan Issel was some of the best ball I ever saw wish there was more footage around

[jongib369]

2 all time greats tho lot of slamming and jamming back then!!

A-Train and Dan Issel was some of the best ball I ever saw wish there was more footage around
If you were drafting one of them would you have a hard time choosing between the two?

[bizil]

2 all time greats tho lot of slamming and jamming back then!!

A-Train and Dan Issel was some of the best ball I ever saw wish there was more footage around

I think Gilmore and Issel may have been one of the top 10-15 PF-C combos in all of pro basketball history. I can only imagine the havoc they wreaked together in the ABA. I wasn't even born at the time, but their games I'm sure complemented each other great. And on the subject of underrated, Issel is pretty underrated himself.

[CavaliersFTW]

Both are more 'forgotten' than they are underrated. I've probably seen as much footage of both as anyone can.

Gilmore will give you better offense, Thurmond will give you better defense, they'll both snag rebounds at about the same clip. I believe Thurmond had trouble staying healthy the 2nd half of his career. Both were physical freaks, Thurmond on the part of length and Gilmore on the part of strength and early in his career all around leaping ability and agility.

[bizil]

Both are more 'forgotten' than they are underrated. I've probably seen as much footage of both as anyone can.

Gilmore will give you better offense, Thurmond will give you better defense, they'll both snag rebounds at about the same clip. I believe Thurmond had trouble staying healthy the 2nd half of his career. Both were physical freaks, Thurmond on the part of length and Gilmore on the part of strength and early in his career all around leaping ability and agility.

Great points! But in a sense being forgotten is bound to make u underrated. Because if u are forgotten, u name isn't being mentioned as much as it should.

[LAZERUSS]

Thurmond may very well be the greatest one-on-one defending center of all-time. No one gave Wilt, or a peak Kareem more trouble.

Gilmore was a beast in his ABA years, but his rebounding and defense started decline by the time he hit the NBA. He was still a good rebounder in his NBA days, but was never as dominant as a young Artis had been in the ABA. Still, he had some truly remarkable scoring/efficiency combination seasons. Several 18-19 ppg seasons on about .650 shooting.

Overall, the two would be ranked very close. Both solidly in the Top-50.

[La Frescobaldi]

If you were drafting one of them would you have a hard time choosing between the two?

Do you mean between Thurmond and Gilmore? I maybe would be taking Nate. Problem is he was constantly injured. Gilmore was awesome, and he did great in the NBA, but he was dominating a weaker ABA league (regardless of drj4ever, that is a fact) so it's kinda hard to say what that was really. Early Gilmore could jump right out the house and he was real fast, he could keep up with the guards.

I dunno man, they were both great great players.

Dan Issel is still 9th on the all-time scoring list so that kinda tells you he was a torrential downpour of points.... although again, in the weak-sister league.

[jongib369]

Thurmond may very well be the greatest one-on-one defending center of all-time. No one gave Wilt, or a peak Kareem more trouble.

Gilmore was a beast in his ABA years, but his rebounding and defense started decline by the time he hit the NBA. He was still a good rebounder in his NBA days, but was never as dominant as a young Artis had been in the ABA. Still, he had some truly remarkable scoring/efficiency combination seasons. Several 18-19 ppg seasons on about .650 shooting.

Overall, the two would be ranked very close. Both solidly in the Top-50.
Do you happen to know what Wilts career FG% was against Thurmond? Or how they fared rebounding against each other

[LAZERUSS]

Do you happen to know what Wilts career FG% was against Thurmond? Or how they fared rebounding against each other

Off the top of my head...I believe Wilt held a known .540 to .360 FG% margin over Nate. It was just an incredible differential.

Not sure on the their rebounding totals, but Thurmond only outrebounded Wilt a couple of times in their regular season series H2H's, and in their three post-season H2H series, covering 17 games, Chamberlain just crushed Thurmond by about 5 rpg overall.

BTW, in Wilt's 66-67 season regular season, and against a PEAK Thurmond (in Nate's greatest season), in their regular season H2H's, Chamberlain outscored Thurmond, 20.8 ppg to 13.0 ppg, outrebounded Nate, 25.0 rpg to 23.8 rpg, and outshot him by...get this... a .633 to .320 margin. Then, in their six game Finals, Wilt outscored Nate in five of the six games; outrebounded Nate in five of the six games; outassisted Nate in five of the six games; and outshot him from the field in all six. Overall, a 17.5 to 14.3 ppg, margin; a 28.5 rpg to 26.7 rpg margin; and a .560 to .343 FG% margin.