Bruce Blitz'a Top 50 Players of All Time

[IGOTGAME]

1 Michael Jordan
2 Kareem Abdul Jabbar
3 Wilt Chamberlain
4 Magic Johnson
5 Larry Bird
6 Bill Russell
7 Hakem Olajuwon
8 Oscar Robertson
9 Shaquille O'Neal
10 Tim Duncan
11 Karl Malone
12 Moses Malone
13 Jerry West
14 Bob Pettit
15 Charles Barkley
16 David Robinson
17 Kobe Bryant
18 Dirk Nowitzki (+12)
19 LeBron James
20 Kevin Garnett
21 George Mikan
22 Dr J
23 Dwyane Wade (+4)
24 Bob Cousy
25 Elgin Baylor
26 John Havlicek
27 John Stockton
28 Clyde Drexler
29 Rick Barry
30 Isiah Thomas
31 Gary Payton
32 Patrick Ewing
33 Bob McAdoo
34 Walt Frazier
35 Neil Johnston
36 George Gervin
37 Elvin Hayes
38 Scottie Pippen
39 Dominique Wilkins
40 Dolph Schayes
41 Jerry Lucas
42 Steve Nash
43 Allen Iverson
44 Jason Kidd
45 Willis Reed
46 Tiny Archibald
47 Dave Cowens
48 Paul Arizin
49 Walt Bellamy
50 Pistol Pete

what do you think? changes?

[DirkNowitzki41]

Kobe at 17 :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

Lebron at 19 is too high right now, Wade should be higher than him.

[bleedinpurpleTwo]

Im convinced that you ARE bruce blitz because you keep bringing him up.
Blitz has severe issues.

[kaiiu]

:blah :sleeping Please stop posting this idiots bullshit. Lebrick-19? Kobe- 17? Jordan- 1? :roll: :roll:

[IGOTGAME]

Im convinced that you ARE bruce blitz because you keep bringing him up.
Blitz has severe issues.

nope. I find him interesting. As much as I may disagree...he is passionate and puts lots of time into researching players. I you account for the bias, some of the stats he puts out are worth at least hearing. But yes, he is crazy.

[KingMichael23]

Kobe at #17?

[SAKOTXA]

So Dirk and Kobe are only one place apart!!! This man has opened my eyes, i see the light now.

[Thorn]

11 Karl Malone

Wtf? And lol @ Kobe just behind David Robinson.

[blablabla]

worst list ever

[IGOTGAME]

my advice is to forget about where Kobe is placed when looking at the list. Everyone knows that bias. Just try to analyze it from that light.

[Samurai Swoosh]

Blitz has severe issues.
Being a grown man who wears MMA style fight club shirts, with a Frank Sinatra hat ... WITH sunglasses on ... INSIDE

Yea, that's putting it lightly.

[blablabla]

my advice is to forget about where Kobe is placed when looking at the list. Everyone knows that bias. Just try to analyze it from that light.
isiah at 30 robinson at 16 ewing 32 kg 20 malone 11 frazier 34
like i said

[SAKOTXA]

Hakeem being greater than Shaq is also laughable.

Oscar greater than Shaq and Duncan? :facepalm

[Samurai Swoosh]

SMH @ Oscar even in the top ten.

:facepalm

[IGOTGAME]

isiah at 30 robinson at 16 ewing 32 kg 20 malone 11 frazier 34
like i said

I never said I thought it was a good list. I just wanted people to articulate what they thought was wrong with it.

[blablabla]

I never said I thought it was a good list. I just wanted people to articulate what they thought was wrong with it.
that's what i did i pointed out what i don't agree with
i didn't include kobe cause that's just :facepalm
also dream>shaq

[Thorn]

Haha, I just saw he put Neil Johnston at #35, above Pippen at #38. Gotta love Jordan stans bringing Pip down! :facepalm

[ProfessorMurder]

Bron's too high, Kobe's a few spots too low, Ewing and Pippen should be a bit higher.

I'd also like to see Nique over Pistol Pete.

The other stuff is just small gripes I have. Everyone has their own lists though.

[az00m]

Bird should be higher than magic.

[BlackJoker23]

igotgame is the biggest ******* on this board.

kobe should be lower.

[-playmaker-]

Dirk should be higher than Jordan...

[G-Funk]

n.he is passionate and puts lots of time into researching players.

And this is what he comes up with???:facepalm

[Rose]

:roll: :roll:

[Round Mound]

Hakeem > Bird and Magic

Charles > Karl Malone (Get Real)

[Samurai Swoosh]

[B]Hakeem > Bird and Magic
:facepalm

[Mr. I'm So Rad]

It's a good thing no one takes Bruce seriously...

[kaiiu]

Hakeem > Bird and Magic

Charles > Karl Malone (Get Real)
:no: I ll give you Tragic

[catch24]

With the exception of his bias for Kobe and the overrating of Robertson, his rankings are pretty solid. Dirk and LeBron are somewhere between #20-25 all-time for most people.

[atljonesbro]

It's impossible to make a top 50 list without everyone thinking it sucks. I've never seen a top 50 list ever were people thought it was actually good. They all "sucked"

[Samurai Swoosh]

With the exception of his bias for Kobe and the overrating of Robertson, his rankings are pretty solid. Dirk and LeBron are somewhere between #20-25 all-time for most people.
You don't take exception with Oscar being in the top ten?

[Heavincent]

Kobe #17
Lebron #19

:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

[Samurai Swoosh]

Kobe #17
Lebron #19

:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:
Maybe that was his sister or cousin in Colorado ...

I just don't get it honestly.

I mean LeBron is top twenty, for sure ...

But two spots down from Bryant?

Really?

:oldlol:

[catch24]

You don't take exception with Oscar being in the top ten?

I don't because he views him like LeBron - a stat-padding junkie. I should have added his bias for LeBron, but that goes hand in hand with his distaste for Bryant.

[Samurai Swoosh]

I don't because he views him like LeBron - a stat-padding junkie.
Good point. haha

You think if that were the case though, he'd have Pippen way higher too.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Hell, I could see much more of a case for Lebron being over Oscar than Oscar being top 10.

[Samurai Swoosh]

Hell, I could see much more of a case for Lebron being over Oscar than Oscar being top 10.
Uh, me too.

[Heavincent]

Maybe that was his sister or cousin in Colorado ...

I just don't get it honestly.

I mean LeBron is top twenty, for sure ...

But two spots down from Bryant?

Really?

:oldlol:

There is absolutely no evidence that would put Lebron anywhere near Kobe in terms of career accomplishments. Lebron just isn't even close.

Jason Kidd at #44 is also incredibly stupid. He is a top 25 player at worse.

[magnax1]

Hell, I could see much more of a case for Lebron being over Oscar than Oscar being top 10.
where do you have Jerry West then?

[Stringer Bell]

Blitz is like Patton Oswalt in the movie Big Fan.

[ShaqAttack3234]

where do you have Jerry West then?

Somewhere in the top 11-15 range. Probably 12. I might put Mikan 11 ignoring the fact that I doubt he could compete in later eras and just including him because his play vs his peers would make him top 10 and how much he changed the game.

[catch24]

You think if that were the case though, he'd have Pippen way higher too.

You consider Pipp a stat buffer?

[magnax1]

Somewhere in the top 11-15 range. Probably 12. I might put Mikan 11 ignoring the fact that I doubt he could compete in later eras and just including him because his play vs his peers would make him top 10 and how much he changed the game.
Well I just wondered because everything I've read said Oscar was pretty consistently better in their best years, and statistically it's true too. So I don't really get why you think it's so terrible to have Oscar borderline top 10.
Of course I've only watched like 3 games of oscar, so it's not really a fair assessment.

[Samurai Swoosh]

You consider Pipp a stat buffer?
No, but he filled a lot of stat columns. I legit believe LeBron is a fluffer of his stats. Oscar probably was too. He wasn't a winner, either.

[Samurai Swoosh]

Well I just wondered because everything I've read said Oscar was pretty consistently better in their best years, and statistically it's true too. So I don't really get why you think it's so terrible to have Oscar borderline top 10.
Of course I've only watched like 3 games of oscar, so it's not really a fair assessment.
Because he never won till he piggy backed Lou Alcindor

[ShaqAttack3234]

Well I just wondered because everything I've read said Oscar was pretty consistently better in their best years, and statistically it's true too. So I don't really get why you think it's so terrible to have Oscar borderline top 10.
Of course I've only watched like 3 games of oscar, so it's not really a fair assessment.

Oscar won a total of 2 playoff series when he was the man, I believe and thats around a decade...with just 2 playoff series wins.

West was at least contending every year, won a title as arguably the best player(or certainly closer to Wilt than Oscar was to Kareem), would have won in '69 had Wilt and Baylor showed up at all, and this is legit considering West won finals MVP on the losing team in a close 7 game series.

[catch24]

No, but he filled a lot of stat columns. I legit believe LeBron is a fluffer of his stats. Oscar probably was too. He wasn't a winner, either.

Pretty much the way I look at it too. While I believe James' is a beast and one of the greatest players in the world, watching his games, especially in those Finals, was like watching a role player going through the motions... After the game you look at the statsheet/boxscores and see the guy actually had a triple double :oldlol:

The guy had no f'ing impact when it mattered most.

[Dream34]

You can definitely make the case of Dream over Shaq. Lmao at how Oscar, K. Malone, Petit, DROB, Barkley, and Dr. are all ranked over Kobe.

[Samurai Swoosh]

Pretty much the way I look at it too. While I believe James' is a beast and one of the greatest players in the world, watching his games, especially in those Finals, was like watching a role player going through the motions... After the game you look at the statsheet/boxscores and see the guy had actually had a triple double :oldlol:

The guy had no f'ing impact when it mattered most.
Exactly.

And his stans will run and tell you "OMG ... zoiks ... he had a triple dub in the Finals !!!"

Really?

Because I didn't read the box score, I watched the game ... and he had LITTLE to NO impact on the game.

[magnax1]

Oscar won a total of 2 playoff series when he was the man, I believe and thats around a decade...with just 2 playoff series wins.

West was at least contending every year, won a title as arguably the best player(or certainly closer to Wilt than Oscar was to Kareem), would have won in '69 had Wilt and Baylor showed up at all, and this is legit considering West won finals MVP on the losing team in a close 7 game series.
Yeah, but West had Elgin Baylor who was better then him for quite a bit of their careers so it's not exactly fair to compare them like that.
And winning 2 playoff series doesn't mean much, especially when there were only 2 or three rounds in the playoffs for most of his career.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Pretty much the way I look at it too. While I believe James' is a beast and one of the greatest players in the world, watching his games, especially in those Finals, was like watching a role player going through the motions... After the game you look at the statsheet/boxscores and see the guy actually had a triple double :oldlol:

The guy had no f'ing impact when it mattered most.

Actually, it's funny because he had what you'd think was a monster triple double in game 6 vs Boston last year(27/19/10), but when I was watching that game, I never thought he was having a good game. I've seen people cite that statline since then as Lebron showing up, but to me when they do that, it's clear that they didn't watch the game. And it's funny that they'll cite the stats that make it look positive, but overlook the 9 turnovers or 8/21 shooting.

[Bring-Your-Js]

Oscar won a total of 2 playoff series when he was the man, I believe and thats around a decade...with just 2 playoff series wins.

West was at least contending every year, won a title as arguably the best player(or certainly closer to Wilt than Oscar was to Kareem), would have won in '69 had Wilt and Baylor showed up at all, and this is legit considering West won finals MVP on the losing team in a close 7 game series.

:oldlol: :bowdown:

[Dream34]

That 2010 series still baffles me to the day. You just recover the homecourt advantageby shredding the Celtics D with a dominant 38 point game 3; then, you just stop playing and dish out 3 lackluster efforts in a row. He had 9 turnovers in game 6, but people tend to forge that he turned the ball over 7 times in game 4. I also believe that four of them came in the critical fourth quarter where the game and the 3-1 series lead was for the taking...just head-scratching

[Bring-Your-Js]

ShaqAttack are you positive Wilt didn't actually DOMINATE Russell on the boards 83-16 in the first half, while OUTSCORING him 22-6?

[Rose]

ShaqAttack are you positive Wilt didn't actually DOMINATE Russell on the boards 83-16 in the first half, while OUTSCORING him 22-6?
I'm hoping you typo'd

Or Wilt is the GOAT.

[catch24]

Actually, it's funny because he had what you'd think was a monster triple double in game 6 vs Boston last year(27/19/10), but when I was watching that game, I never thought he was having a good game. I've seen people cite that statline since then as Lebron showing up, but to me when they do that, it's clear that they didn't watch the game. And it's funny that they'll cite the stats that make it look positive, but overlook the 9 turnovers or 8/21 shooting.

27/19/10? Damn.. I knew he had a TD, but not almost a 20/20 game :oldlol:

But yeah, thought the same thing last year as well. Crazy thing about it is, LeBron is the only player I feel that way about. Like his stats don't necessarily match whats happening.

You're watching, but your eyes just don't see it.

[Samurai Swoosh]

You're watching, but your eyes just don't see it.
It's always been about context, dude

[catch24]

It's always been about context, dude

True, good point. I don't know guys, maybe its just me though? I'm probably not watching the aspects of the game I should be.

[Samurai Swoosh]

True, good point. I don't know guys, maybe its just me though? I'm probably not watching the aspects of the game I should be.
No ... you are ... that's why you feel its awkward when you see the fluffed up stats at the end.

He's like the kid who writes a 1/2 page paper, but the minimum requirement is 2 pages at least.

So he "fluffs" it up ... says the same thing over and over in different ways with no new legitimate and strong information added to the paper.

And at the end, it's two pages.

:oldlol:

[Eat Like A Bosh]

That's a very biased list right there.
No one should take that clown seriously.

Kobe is a legit top 10 right now. Wade can go ahead of LeBron. Dirk just one spot behind Kobe? Ok. Bill Russell and Wilt should swap spots. Tim Shaq and Kobe all have legit cases over Oscar.
........
Just a really ****ed up list in general.

[chazzy]

Like his stats don't necessarily match whats happening.

You're watching, but your eyes just don't see it.
Kevin Love in a nutshell :lol

[catch24]

No ... you are ... that's why you feel its awkward when you see the fluffed up stats at the end.

He's like the kid who writes a 1/2 page paper, but the minimum requirement is 2 pages at least.

So he "fluffs" it up ... says the same thing over and over in different ways with no new legitimate and strong information added to the paper.

And at the end, it's two pages.

:oldlol:

Well, at least I'm not the only one :lol :applause:

[jstern]

I think that's his list from last year, he said that he would move Kobe up, I forgot at what position, but significantly I think, if he had won the Finals this year. But considering Kobe's getting sweepead, Bruceblitz probably dropped him a few spots.

[The Macho Man]

Who the fukk is Bruce Blitz

[BIZARRO]

You don't take exception with Oscar being in the top ten?


The underrating of Oscar Robertson here is flat out nonsense, as NOBODY here with the exception of like one or two people here ever SAW him actualy play. I never saw him either, or Wilt, Russell, etc., so I can only go by what older folks say and they swear by Oscar.
Sure all the ISH stathounds will say, "He only has one title as a sidekick, never as the man, empty stats, blah, blah, blah..."

But, Ill take these guys words who played against/coached against, etc. (Havlichek, Auerbach, Chuck Daly, Satch Sanders, Jerry West; pretty great basketball minds...)

Watch below from 1:15-2:00.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4piRZ8_7GY

And West adds a "Period."


As far as Blitz's list, I would switch Hakeem and Shaq, and also Kobe and The Mailman...but other than that, it's not bad at all really...everybody's will always be slightly different...

[NugzHeat3]

The underrating of Oscar Robertson here is flat out nonsense, as NOBODY here with the exception of like one or two people here ever SAW him actualy play. I never saw him either, or Wilt, Russell, etc., so I can only go by what older folks say and they swear by Oscar.
Sure all the ISH stathounds will say, "He only has one title as a sidekick, never as the man, empty stats, blah, blah, blah..."

But, Ill take these guys words who played against/coached against, etc. (Havlichek, Auerbach, Chuck Daly, Satch Sanders, Jerry West; pretty great basketball minds...)

Watch below from 1:15-2:00.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4piRZ8_7GY

And West adds a "Period."


As far as Blitz's list, I would switch Hakeem and Shaq, and also Kobe and The Mailman...but other than that, it's not bad at all really...everybody's will always be slightly different...
**** outta here, please. John Wooden said Kobe is the GOAT; he's seen more basketball than anybody else on here combined and probably knows it better than anyone else too. You agree with that opinion? How about Jerry West saying LeBron surpassed Kobe in 09 and then going on to say Kobe is better (as well as being the GOAT Laker). Players/coaches say lots of stuff in the heat of the moment, for a reaction (looking at Shaq and Barkley) and end up contradicting themselves. Their opinions don't mean much since there's so many biases involved.

[BIZARRO]

**** outta here, please. John Wooden said Kobe is the GOAT; he's seen more basketball than anybody else on here combined and probably knows it better than anyone else too. You agree with that opinion? How about Jerry West saying LeBron surpassed Kobe in 09 and then going on to say Kobe is better (as well as being the GOAT Laker). Players/coaches say lots of stuff in the heat of the moment, for a reaction (looking at Shaq and Barkley) and end up contradicting themselves. Their opinions don't mean much since there's so many biases involved.

Sorry man, when West says "He's the greatest player I ever played against, period." It means something.

I'm not saying he is THE greatest. Neither of us know that. I'm just saying to take exception to Oscar being in the top ten is just off. He may not even be in the top ten for all we know. But to take exception to someone saying it is nonsense, considering no one here saw him play, and because so many of these older guys speak EXTRAORDINARILY highly of him as THE best from back then.

Chuck Daly's comments in particular mean something as that guy is nails.

[Mr. Jabbar]

Why not just place kobe at #38 or somethign like that. Not like your agenda isn't already blantaly obvious.

Bruce Blitz Fails (Once again)

[NugzHeat3]

Sorry man, when West says "He's the greatest player I ever played against, period." It means something.

I'm not saying he is THE greatest. Neither of us know that. I'm just saying to take exception to Oscar being in the top ten is just off. He may not even be in the top ten for all we know. But to take exception to someone saying it is nonsense, considering no one here saw him play, and because so many of these older guys speak EXTRAORDINARILY highly of him as THE best from back then.

Chuck Daly's comments in particular mean something as that guy is nails.
Jerry West has also said Wilt is the greatest player ever.

"You just don't think things like this are going to happen to people of his stature," echoed Jerry West, the Lakers executive who played against Chamberlain for many years, then with him on the great '72 Lakers squad.

"He was the most unbelievable center to ever play the game in terms of domination and intimidation. There's no one that's ever played the game better than Wilt Chamberlain. This was a man for all ages."



So, which quote do you believe? Does that not nullify the statement he made about Robertson? Not the only time West has contradicted himself. See his statements about LeBron and Kobe.

Point being everything these coaches, players ect say is probably meant to be taken with a grain of salt. You want to say Oscar is great, use something else to back it up. I really don't care where Oscar is ranked to be honest. I think it's stupid to use the quote game. Players within Oscar's era are naturally going to prop him up since they're still stuck back in the day and can't give credit to future generations.

[brownmamba00]

:roll: :roll: at Oscar over Shaq and TD. And another:oldlol: for Wilt over Magic and Bird.

[L.Kizzle]

How were these rankings done?

Why is Neil Johnston at #35?

[IGOTGAME]

How were these rankings done?

Why is Neil Johnston at #35?

here is the explanation

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxPOVVX9j4M&list=PL4D8A54BB645AA946

[Bring-Your-Js]

:roll: :roll: at Oscar over Shaq and TD. And another:oldlol: for Wilt over Magic and Bird.

Larry Bird wasn't afraid to fight folks.

[Fatal9]

No ... you are ... that's why you feel its awkward when you see the fluffed up stats at the end.

He's like the kid who writes a 1/2 page paper, but the minimum requirement is 2 pages at least.

So he "fluffs" it up ... says the same thing over and over in different ways with no new legitimate and strong information added to the paper.

And at the end, it's two pages.
His rebounding average has always been overrated. He's the king of cleaning up easy rebounds on the defensive glass. His offensive rebound numbers (the rebounds you actually have to fight for) have always been pathetic. Rose had more offensive rebounds than him this season, same with Westbrook, Rondo etc etc...fukk Steve Nash in his prime was almost getting as many as LeBron does. Took the dude over two freaking weeks to grab his first offensive rebound this season.

[ShaqAttack3234]

His rebounding average has always been overrated. He's the king of cleaning up easy rebounds on the defensive glass. His offensive rebound numbers (the rebounds you actually have to fight for) have always been pathetic. Rose had more offensive rebounds than him this season, same with Westbrook, Rondo etc etc...fukk Steve Nash in his prime was almost getting as many as LeBron does. Took the dude over two freaking weeks to grab his first offensive rebound this season.

Actually, I remember thinking he was padding his rebounding numbers during game 6 vs Boston in 2010 in particular. Haven't seen the game since, but I'll have to keep more of an eye on that next time I watch that game.

[magnax1]

Lebron isn't as good at rebounding as the stats suggest but saying you don't have to fight for defensive rebounds is kind of stupid.

[Jacks3]

For a significant number of defensive rebounds, there are multiple defensive players present for the rebound (could get the rebound), while the offense has already cleared out to cut off the fast break. These rebounds do not show value or skill to the player who gets them, but are rather a random/confounding variable. For some teams, their center will grab such "garbage" rebounds. For other teams, maybe the PG will grab them himself (I see OKC and Russel Westbrook do this, or Kidd with the Nets).

[jlauber]

Oscar won a total of 2 playoff series when he was the man, I believe and thats around a decade...with just 2 playoff series wins.

West was at least contending every year, won a title as arguably the best player(or certainly closer to Wilt than Oscar was to Kareem), would have won in '69 had Wilt and Baylor showed up at all, and this is legit considering West won finals MVP on the losing team in a close 7 game series.

Let's examine this a little closer, shall we? First of all, the Lakers were ONE PLAY away from running away with that series, 4 games to 1. Johnny Egan's gaffe at the end of game four prevented LA from winning that game, and then after Wilt CRUSHED Russell in game five (outscoring him and outrebounding him by a 31-13 margin), the Lakers would have won that series, 4-1. Of course the REAL REASON why the Lakers lost that Finals was because of INCOMPETENT coaching. Why was Wilt on the bench in the last five minutes of that game seven? And why was Mel f*****g Counts playing in those last five minutes ( he would miss a couple of shots down the stretch, and wound up 4-13 from the floor)? BTW, it was WEST with a couple of turnovers in those final five minutes, too. Of course, Baylor was nowhere to be found in games three thru five (a COMBINED 24 points), two of the losses. And another example of idiotic coaching...how about early in the 4th quarter of that game seven...when the Lakers passed the ball into Chamberlain, and he went right around a defenseless Russell, who was saddled with five fouls, for an easy finger-roll. Guess what, ...Wilt did not get another pass near the rim the rest of the game. Even a below-average coach would have force-fed the ball into Wilt's hands the rest of the game. Not the truly bumbling Van Breda Kolf, who did everything in his power to PREVENT Wilt from dominating in the Finals. In any case, Wilt outscored and outrebounded Russell in that series (as he always did), and he most certainly outshot him, (although we don't have the numbers...Wilt shot .545 in the playoffs, while Russell shot .423.) And how about that game seven again? Russell, in 48 minutes, scored SIX points, on 2-7 shooting, with 21 rebounds. In his 43 minutes, Chamberlain scored 18 points, on 7-8 shooting, with 27 rebounds. Oh, and BTW...ANOTHER example of truly horrid COACHING? While Van Breda Kolf schackled Wilt on offense, he gave Baylor the green light. How did that work out? Baylor shot .385 in the post-season, while Chamberlain shot .545.

And while West deserves a ranking in the top-15, he should be FAR behind Wilt. Why? Ok, ShaqAttack blames WILT for losing the '69 Finals. How about West in the '70 Finals? In game seven, Wilt was the ONLY Laker who showed up. Meanwhile West was murdered by Frazier, and the game was over by halftime.

BTW, Wilt PLAYED in the '70 Finals, despite being four months removed from major knee surgery. Why is that important? Because West MISSED the '71 playoffs (as did Baylor), while a well-past his prime Wilt battled a prime Kareem to a draw in the '71 WCF's.

Of course, how about the '72 post-season? While West was mired in the worst shooting slump of his career (.376 in the playoffs), Wilt outplayed a prime Kareem, and then dominated the Knicks in the Finals (including a clinching game five performance with one badly sprained wrist, and the other FRACTURED), in which Chamberlain won the FINALS MVP.

And in Wilt's last Finals, in 72-73, West was again awful, while Wilt did all he could, including his very last game of his career, in which he scored 23 points with 21 rebounds.

In Wilt's five seasons in LA, the Lakers went to the Finals in FOUR of them, and had West (and Baylor) not missed the '71 post-season, it probably would have been 5-5. BEFORE Wilt, the Lakers best record in LA was 52-30. With Wilt, they went 55-27, then he missed nearly all of '70, and they only went 46-36. Meanwhile Baylor missed all but two games in '71, and West missed the entire last third of the season, and LA still went 48-34 with Chamberlain. In '72 they went 69-13 (with an overwhelming title), and in Wilt's last season in LA, they went 60-22 (and yet another Finals.) AFTER Wilt, they fell to 47-35, and a first round playoff sweeping loss.)

So, yes, West is a top-15 player, but he is WAY behind Chamberlain.

[Nastradamus]

Hakeem being greater than Shaq is also laughable.

Oscar greater than Shaq and Duncan? :facepalm

All of these things are at least debatable. Shaq was slightly more dominant offensively, but Hakeem was much more impactful defensively and he also never played on near the caliber of teams Shaq did. Even once he got Drexler past prime(though still a stud), his teams were pretty average. Similar to the Lebron Cavs teams, the Iverson Philly teams or the Tim Duncan Spurs for title #2. They were even worse in the first few years of his career. So you can't really use rings against him. He took worse teams to multiple rings.

[PHILA]

Of course the REAL REASON why the Lakers lost that Finals was because of INCOMPETENT coaching.


Besides G5 of the Finals when Butch inexplicably left West in at the end of a decided game to badly injure a hamstring (could not effectively guard Sam Jones anymore, who went wild), there was the infamous G7.


http://i.imgur.com/5ehUt.jpg


'After Van Breda Kolff was gone, Chamberlain criticized his heavy drinking, his penchant for conducting farting contests, and his failure to prepare for games.'



Tall Tales: The Glory Years of the NBA - Terry Pluto

Earl Strom: In a sense, I respect Butch for making one of the dumbest moves any coach has ever made.


http://i.imgur.com/Jv97n.png



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilt_Chamberlain

[i]Game 7 featured a surreal scene: in anticipation of a Lakers win, Lakers owner Jack Kent Cooke had put up thousands of balloons in the rafters of the Forum in Los Angeles. This display of arrogance motivated the Celtics and angered Jerry West.[75] In that match, Chamberlain experienced his second Game 7 debacle. The Lakers trailed by 76

[ShaqAttack3234]

Let's examine this a little closer, shall we? First of all, the Lakers were ONE PLAY away from running away with that series, 4 games to 1. Johnny Egan's gaffe at the end of game four prevented LA from winning that game, and then after Wilt CRUSHED Russell in game five (outscoring him and outrebounding him by a 31-13 margin), the Lakers would have won that series, 4-1. Of course the REAL REASON why the Lakers lost that Finals was because of INCOMPETENT coaching. Why was Wilt on the bench in the last five minutes of that game seven? And why was Mel f*****g Counts playing in those last five minutes ( he would miss a couple of shots down the stretch, and wound up 4-13 from the floor)? BTW, it was WEST with a couple of turnovers in those final five minutes, too. Of course, Baylor was nowhere to be found in games three thru five (a COMBINED 24 points), two of the losses. And another example of idiotic coaching...how about early in the 4th quarter of that game seven...when the Lakers passed the ball into Chamberlain, and he went right around a defenseless Russell, who was saddled with five fouls, for an easy finger-roll. Guess what, ...Wilt did not get another pass near the rim the rest of the game. Even a below-average coach would have force-fed the ball into Wilt's hands the rest of the game. Not the truly bumbling Van Breda Kolf, who did everything in his power to PREVENT Wilt from dominating in the Finals. In any case, Wilt outscored and outrebounded Russell in that series (as he always did), and he most certainly outshot him, (although we don't have the numbers...Wilt shot .545 in the playoffs, while Russell shot .423.) And how about that game seven again? Russell, in 48 minutes, scored SIX points, on 2-7 shooting, with 21 rebounds. In his 43 minutes, Chamberlain scored 18 points, on 7-8 shooting, with 27 rebounds. Oh, and BTW...ANOTHER example of truly horrid COACHING? While Van Breda Kolf schackled Wilt on offense, he gave Baylor the green light. How did that work out? Baylor shot .385 in the post-season, while Chamberlain shot .545.

And while West deserves a ranking in the top-15, he should be FAR behind Wilt. Why? Ok, ShaqAttack blames WILT for losing the '69 Finals. How about West in the '70 Finals? In game seven, Wilt was the ONLY Laker who showed up. Meanwhile West was murdered by Frazier, and the game was over by halftime.

BTW, Wilt PLAYED in the '70 Finals, despite being four months removed from major knee surgery. Why is that important? Because West MISSED the '71 playoffs (as did Baylor), while a well-past his prime Wilt battled a prime Kareem to a draw in the '71 WCF's.

Of course, how about the '72 post-season? While West was mired in the worst shooting slump of his career (.376 in the playoffs), Wilt outplayed a prime Kareem, and then dominated the Knicks in the Finals (including a clinching game five performance with one badly sprained wrist, and the other FRACTURED), in which Chamberlain won the FINALS MVP.

And in Wilt's last Finals, in 72-73, West was again awful, while Wilt did all he could, including his very last game of his career, in which he scored 23 points with 21 rebounds.

In Wilt's five seasons in LA, the Lakers went to the Finals in FOUR of them, and had West (and Baylor) not missed the '71 post-season, it probably would have been 5-5. BEFORE Wilt, the Lakers best record in LA was 52-30. With Wilt, they went 55-27, then he missed nearly all of '70, and they only went 46-36. Meanwhile Baylor missed all but two games in '71, and West missed the entire last third of the season, and LA still went 48-34 with Chamberlain. In '72 they went 69-13 (with an overwhelming title), and in Wilt's last season in LA, they went 60-22 (and yet another Finals.) AFTER Wilt, they fell to 47-35, and a first round playoff sweeping loss.)

So, yes, West is a top-15 player, but he is WAY behind Chamberlain.

:facepalm Didn't Wilt average 11.7 ****ing ppg in the '69 finals after averaging over 20 during the '69 season?

Wow, Wilt improved the Lakers from a 52-30 team that lost in the finals to a 55-27 team that lost in the finals....what an impact! :bowdown:

And that 3 game improvement came with West playing 10 more games in '69 than '68. That improvement is STAGGERING.

I've said this many times, but it's funny how you keep bringing up the Lakers falling from 60-22 to 47-35 after Wilt retired without mentioning that West went from playing 69 games in '73 to 31 in '74.

[chazzy]

Actually, I remember thinking he was padding his rebounding numbers during game 6 vs Boston in 2010 in particular. Haven't seen the game since, but I'll have to keep more of an eye on that next time I watch that game.
He was flying in from halfcourt to grab missed opposing FTs over teammates. I couldn't believe his final statline when the game was over :oldlol:

[jlauber]

:facepalm Didn't Wilt average 11.7 ****ing ppg in the '69 finals after averaging over 20 during the '69 season?

Wow, Wilt improved the Lakers from a 52-30 team that lost in the finals to a 55-27 team that lost in the finals....what an impact! :bowdown:

And that 3 game improvement came with West playing 10 more games in '69 than '68. That improvement is STAGGERING.

I've said this many times, but it's funny how you keep bringing up the Lakers falling from 60-22 to 47-35 after Wilt retired without mentioning that West went from playing 69 games in '73 to 31 in '74.


:roll: :roll:

Wilt averaging 11.7 in the Finals (and probably on well over 55%...since he shot 50% against Thurmond in a previous round)..along with being the BEST rebounder in the series at 25 rpg!

How about that "improvement?" Wilt was TRADED for THREE players, and then the Lakers lost HOFer Goodrich in the expansion draft. So, Wilt effectively replaced 42 ppg and 18 rpg (with only Johnny Egan and his measley 8 ppg and blown game four of the Finals as the other replacement) . West also missed 20 games in the '69 season...so with ALL of that, the Lakers set a franchise record with a 55-27 record. I also found this VERY fascinating. In Wilt's last season in Philadelphia, he took a team that was DEVASTATED by injuries, to a game seven, four loss to the Celtics in the ECF's. He was "traded" to the Lakers...and how did his replacements perform in the post-season in Philly? They averaged 36 ppg and 20 rpg on .510 shooting...and yet, Boston blew them out in the first round, 4-1. Think about that...Wilt averaged 12 ppg and 25 rpg in the Finals, and yet the Lakers STILL lost a game seven by TWO points (and with Wilt missing the last 5-6 minutes.) His IMPACT was STAGGERING.

Of course, looking at Wilt's ENTIRE career, in comparison to West's, is simply a ROUT. Wilt took FAR less talented teama further early in his career, than a West-Baylor combo could together (and both of those players are generally ranked in the top-20 BTW.) THEN, when Wilt finally had a semblance of surrounding talent, he took his teams to the BEST RECORD in the league in his three full seasons in Philadelphia (as well as taking a 40-40 76er team to a game seven, ONE point loss to the HOF-laden and 62-18 Celtics in the '65 ECF's...while West could only watch as the Celtics crushed his team in the Finals, 4-1.)

Wilt not only DRAMATICALLY improved EVERY team he joined...EVERY team he left became MUCH worse...especially over the course of their next SEVERAL seasons. EVERY team he joined set a TEAM RECORD for W-L (and in fact, TWO of them are STILL team recordsa with the Sixers and Lakers.) And EVERY team he left either missed the playoffs altogether...or were eliminated 4-1 and 4-1 in the FIRST ROUND of the playoffs.)

Once again, as great as West was, and he is certainly top-15, his career PALES in comparison to Wilt's.

[ShaqAttack3234]

:roll: :roll:

Wilt averaging 11.7 in the Finals (and probably on well over 55%...since he shot 50% against Thurmond in a previous round)..along with being the BEST rebounder in the series at 25 rpg!

How about that "improvement?" Wilt was TRADED for THREE players, and then the Lakers lost HOFer Goodrich in the expansion draft. So, Wilt effectively replaced 42 ppg and 18 rpg (with only Johnny Egan and his measley 8 ppg and blown game four of the Finals as the other replacement) . West also missed 20 games in the '69 season...so with ALL of that, the Lakers set a franchise record with a 55-27 record. I also found this VERY fascinating. In Wilt's last season in Philadelphia, he took a team that was DEVASTATED by injuries, to a game seven, four loss to the Celtics in the ECF's. He was "traded" to the Lakers...and how did his replacements perform in the post-season in Philly? They averaged 36 ppg and 20 rpg on .510 shooting...and yet, Boston blew them out in the first round, 4-1. Think about that...Wilt averaged 12 ppg and 25 rpg in the Finals, and yet the Lakers STILL lost a game seven by TWO points (and with Wilt missing the last 5-6 minutes.) His IMPACT was STAGGERING.

Of course, looking at Wilt's ENTIRE career, in comparison to West's, is simply a ROUT. Wilt took FAR less talented teama further early in his career, than a West-Baylor combo could together (and both of those players are generally ranked in the top-20 BTW.) THEN, when Wilt finally had a semblance of surrounding talent, he took his teams to the BEST RECORD in the league in his three full seasons in Philadelphia (as well as taking a 40-40 76er team to a game seven, ONE point loss to the HOF-laden and 62-18 Celtics in the '65 ECF's...while West could only watch as the Celtics crushed his team in the Finals, 4-1.)

Wilt not only DRAMATICALLY improved EVERY team he joined...EVERY team he left became MUCH worse...especially over the course of their next SEVERAL seasons. EVERY team he joined set a TEAM RECORD for W-L (and in fact, TWO of them are STILL team recordsa with the Sixers and Lakers.) And EVERY team he left either missed the playoffs altogether...or were eliminated 4-1 and 4-1 in the FIRST ROUND of the playoffs.)

Once again, as great as West was, and he is certainly top-15, his career PALES in comparison to Wilt's.

Still not addressing my point about you always bringing up the 13 game decline from '73 to '74 without mentioning that West went from playing 69 games to 31? I didn't expect you to, you'll probably always use the same walls of misleading text when someone calls you on something.

[Samurai Swoosh]

His rebounding average has always been overrated. He's the king of cleaning up easy rebounds on the defensive glass. His offensive rebound numbers (the rebounds you actually have to fight for) have always been pathetic. Rose had more offensive rebounds than him this season, same with Westbrook, Rondo etc etc...fukk Steve Nash in his prime was almost getting as many as LeBron does. Took the dude over two freaking weeks to grab his first offensive rebound this season.
I didn't know about those offensive rebound numbers, but yea that's crazy. Guy stat pads a lot of things. FG% too as we saw as recently as the NBA Finals.

[zay_24]

Kobe is number 1


































BEAN!

[jlauber]

Still not addressing my point about you always bringing up the 13 game decline from '73 to '74 without mentioning that West went from playing 69 games to 31? I didn't expect you to, you'll probably always use the same walls of misleading text when someone calls you on something.


YOU are the one that is the master of mis-leading information. You and Fatal9 with your blatant anti-Wilt agenda, even though I have consistently BLOWN-UP EVERY single argument you two have conjured up. It amazes me that you two morons can rank Hakeem, who was a career first round loser (EIGHT times in 15 post-seasons), who only played on five 50+ win teams in 18 seasons (and never a 60 win team), and only four Conference finalists, and only three finals...in 18 seasons...and with FAR less accolades and statistical achievements, over a Wilt who took TWELVE teams to the Conference Finals, SIX to the Finals, as well as FOUR teams to the best record in the league, and FOUR teams with 60+ wins...in his 14 seasons. Of course, Wilt also had a 4-1 edge in MVPs (and it SHOULD have been as many as SEVEN ... in '62 for sure, '69, and '72.) And, of course, the RECORD BOOK CLEARLY ranks Wilt MILES ahead of Hakeem, too.

THAT is pure GARBAGE the two of you constantly spew on this forum.

[Samurai Swoosh]

Who inspired jlauber to come in here along with his guy "PHILA"?

Absolute thread KILLERS.

:facepalm

[YAWN]

lots of fail in this list. but its to be expected from anything that bruce blitz spews :facepalm

[jlauber]

Who inspired jlauber to come in here along with his guy "PHILA"?

Absolute thread KILLERS.

:facepalm

Blame your boy ShaqAttack...who once again could not resist the urge to take a swing at Chamberlain..."who did not show up" in the '69 Finals...except to the point of outplaying HOFer Russell, and by leading BOTH teams in rebounds.

The same ShaqAttack that has Hakeem and Bird in his top-5, and Russell at #9, and Wilt at #10. Hakeem won two titles. Who did he beat? He beat the Knicks in seven games in '94, and the Magic in '95. Let's see...where was MJ in '94? Oh, and how many HOFers were on the Knicks and Magic? Meanwhile, in Wilt's first TEN seasons, he played in a league in which the greatest dynasty in professional team sports resided. A Celtic team that had anywhere from FIVE to NINE HOFers (and a HOF coach) in those ten seasons. In his last four seasons, Chamberlain faced the Knicks, and their FOUR HOFers in '70. Then, in '71, he faced the Kareem-Oscar Bucks (66-16) without BOTH Baylor and West. Then he BEAT that same 63-19 Bucks team the very next season, as well as the Knicks and their FIVE HOFers in the Finals. And in his last season, he again faced the Knicks and their SIX HOFers.

Bird and Hakeem's career's were LIGHT YEARS behind Wilt's.

[Bring-Your-Js]

Jlauber to be fair, you seem to carry an anti-Kareem, anti-Bird agenda yourself. Most definitely where Olajuwon is concerned as well.

[jlauber]

Jlauber to be fair, you seem to carry an anti-Kareem, anti-Bird agenda yourself. Most definitely where Olajuwon is concerned as well.

I have been brutally honest with all three of those guys. I have Kareem at #5, Hakeem at #9 and Bird at #10. However, I have said it many times, I have no problem with those that move Kobe (who I have at #8) around with Hakeem and Bird. I also have Shaq at #6, which is generally HIGHER than most all-time lists.

I tend to look at the ENTIRE body of work. Personal awards, statistical achievements (in BOTH the regular season and post season), and team success. However, regarding TEAM success...a player only has some much control of what teammates he is has, and how they perform. Furthermore,...and this is HUGE...is just how the player performed against his peers. Russell was the greatest "winner" in major professional sports history, and he is #1 on MY all-time list because of that. BUT, those that actually watched, or studied the careers of Russell and Wilt, would attest to the fact that Chamberlain not only outplayed Russell in the vast majority of their H2H games, there were MANY in which Chamberlain just CRUSHED Russell. Here again, Russell had an OVERWHELMING edge in surrounding talent for the first six years of their decade-long battles, and at the very least, a marginal edge in the last four. Then, Wilt had to endure decimating injuries to not only his teammates, but to himself, as well as teammates choking in big games, and incompetent coaching. And, with all of that, Wilt came within an eyelash of beating Russell's "dynasty" FOUR times (losing four game seven's by margins of 2, 1, 4, and 2 points.) Add in the horrible officiating in game five of the '70 Finals, and Wilt was at the very edge of winning FIVE more rings. And the bottom line...he was never outplayed in any of his 29 post-season series, and in the vast majority of them, he pounded his opposing center. Not even Kareem can make that claim (he was outplayed in SEVERAL...including two H2H's with a well-past his prime Wilt.)

IMO, Bird is generally over-rated. He only won three rings, with LOADED rosters, and even in one of those, he was not even the best player on his own team (and it came against a 40-42 team in the Finals.) He had SEVERAL poor shooting post-seasons, and in fact, his post-season shooting was below average in his career, and his Finals' shooting was well-below the league average. And I have found it fascinating that in Bird's three best statistical regular seasons, he played MUCH worse in the those post-seasons.

Hakeem is the most over-rated player on ISH. His entire legacy was built on two playoff runs, and in one of those, the actual best player in the league did not play. Furthermore, those that claim that he did not have much help...take a look at the team's that his Rockets beat in the '94 and '95 Finals. Ewing's Knicks had no more surrounding talent than Hakeem's Rockets, and Shaq's Magic were marginally better (and IMO, Hakeem did not outplay Shaq, either.) Hakeem played in 18 seasons. In only five did he even win 50+ games (and never more than 58.) His team's managed to make it to the conference Finals, FOUR times, and to only THREE Finals. My god, his team's were eliminated in the first round, EIGHT times in 15 post-seasons. One MVP, and only a couple of statistical titles.

Kareem is tough for me. At his best, he was as talented as anyone that has ever played the game. BUT, two scoring titles, one rebounding title, and one FG% title in his 20 years (my god, Wilt had THREE seasons in which he led the NBA in all three of those categories...in the SAME season.) And before Magic arrived, Kareem's career was considered a disappointment. He had TEN prime seasons, and only Finals, and only ONE ring (and even that was questionable, since it came against a 41-41 Warrior team, a 48-34 Laker team that was without BOTH West and Baylor, and then a 42-40 Bullet team in the Finals.) He played on two team's with the best record in the league in the 70's that did not win titles (and one of them was swept in the WCF's.) He also played on two more 60+ win teams that were knocked off in the playoffs, one of them in the first round by a 47-35 Warrior team. He was outplayed in a game seven, and at home, by Dave Cowens. He was outplayed by Thrumond in '72 and neutralized by Nate in '73. Wilt, a year removed from major knee surgery and well-past his prime, battled him to a statistical draw in '71. And then, Wilt outplayed him the very next season.

And consider this...Kareem won that lone title in the decade of the 70's..in league's where a 48-34 Warrior team (and with only one super-star) won a title. Or the 49-33 Blazers (who swept Kareem's 53-29 Lakers en route to the title.) Or a 52-30 Sonics team that routed Kareem's loaded Lakers in '79 (and also romped over them in '78.) And even a 44-38 Bullets team won a title (and in that season, Kareem had Norm Nixon, Jamaal Wilkes, Lou Hudson, and Adrian Dantley.) And I always found it fascinating that Kareem copuld play 44.2 mpg on a 63-19 Bucks team in '72, and yet he could only play 41.2 mpg on a 40-42 Lakers team in '76. And, BTW, he averaged 34.8 ppg on .574 shooting in '72 (on a team that had a +11.1 ppg differential), and yet when the Lakers needed him to produce in '76, his numbers dropped to 27.7 ppg and .529 shooting. Also interesting was the fact that Rick Barry could win a title with Wilkes as his second best player, while Kareem's Lakers were blown out in the first and second rounds with a more-prime Wilkes as his second best teammate (and once again, in leagues where the champions went 52-30 and 44-38.)

As for Magic's impact...well, before Magic arrived, Kareem's Lakers were 40-42, 53-29, 45-37, and 47-35, and all were wiped out in the playoffs (and TWICE by Sonics team's with ONE borderline HOF player.) Magic immediately took the Lakers to a 60-22 record, and a title in his ROOKIE season. Furthermore, Magic led the Lakers to that title, with one of the greatest Finals performances ever in a memorable game six win on the road...and with Kareem at home. Magic outvoted Kareem in the MVP balloting in EIGHT of their ten seasons together (the last eight BTW.) He won three Finals MVP's in those ten seasons (Kareem won one) and he SHOULD have won yet another in '88 (when Worthy won it.) And speaking of the '88 Finals, the Lakers won that title DESPITE the AWFUL play of Kareem. And I have maintained that the '87 Lakers would probably have won a title without Kareem, as well. Furthermore, Magic was injured in game two of the '89 Finals, and Kareem's Lakers were swept. And Kareem was outplayed by Moses in the '81 playoffs, and then pounded by him in '83. Not only that, but AFTER Kareem retired, the Lakser IMPROVED from 57-25 to a 63-19 record. And then Magic took that injured and over-the-hill Laker team to a 58-24 record, and yet another Finals the very next season. Of course, Magic retired, and the Lakers immediately fell to seasons of 43-39 and then an even worse 39-43...which is about what they were with Kareem, and PRE-Magic.