How come Kareem isn't GOAT?

[GS1905]

-6x Championships
-2x Finals MVP (Should've been more because he deserved it more than Magic in some years)
-6x Regular Season MVP
-19x All-Star Game
-10x All Nba First Team
-5x All Nba Second Team
-5x All Defensive First Team
-6x All Defensive Second Team
-Rookie of the year
-1x All Rookie Team
-3x NCAA Men's Basketball Champion
-NCAA Basketball Tournament MOP
-Most points made (38387)
-Unguardable hook shot
-Longevity


How come Kareem isn't Goat?

[RRR3]

http://randomgeekz.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/michael_jordan010.jpg

[GOBB]

How come this thread has been done more than once?

How come? :confusedshrug:

[Odinn]

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=233163

[SAKOTXA]

Because of this guy.

http://www.wallpaperbase.com/wallpapers/celebsm/michaeljordan/michael_jordan_2.jpg

6 time NBA champion
6 Finals MVPs
5 regular season MVPs
10 scoring titles
14 time NBA all star
NBA defensive player of the year.
10 all NBA first teams
9 all defensive first team
NBA rookie of the year
NCAA Champion
Unguardedable fade away
Most dominant player of all time

[GS1905]

http://randomgeekz.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/michael_jordan010.jpg

Yes but I feel like Kareem's case for Goat = Jordan's case for Goat.

[8BeastlyXOIAD]

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=233163
:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

http://i27.tinypic.com/1zgyu78.jpg

[RRR3]

Who else thinks GS is bipolar?

[GS1905]

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=233163

Kareem has a case for GOAT but he is overrated at the same time.

[RRR3]

Kareem has a case for GOAT but he is overrated at the same time.
Just like Kobe is the 5th and 119th best player ever at the same time? :cletus:

[GS1905]

Just like Kobe is the 5th and 119th best player ever at the same time? :cletus:

Madafaka you stupid. I said I would rank kobe at #119 if he had no rings. give it up. you're being stupid nikka

[tontoz]

Kareem has a case for GOAT but he is overrated at the same time.


:facepalm :facepalm :facepalm :facepalm

[RRR3]

Madafaka you stupid. I said I would rank kobe at #119 if he had no rings. give it up. you're being stupid nikka
So being on championship teams makes you go up 114 spots on the all time list? :roll: I suppose Robert Horry is a HOF then.

[GS1905]

So being on championship teams makes you go up 114 spots on the all time list? :roll: I suppose Robert Horry is a HOF then.

No, having 5 ring does. Horry is not on Kobe's level. Stop giving that stupid example every time.

If guys like Iverson, McGrady, Carter, etc had 5 rings they would be in Kobe's place.

[Miller for 3]

Just report and move on. Don't respond to these trolls anymore

[Jacks3]

He is.

[jlip]

This guy says that he is. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8bIDEtpOMs#t=0m15s)

[jlauber]

Kareem has a case. As do Russell, Magic, Wilt, and of course, MJ.

[millwad]

Kareem has a case. As do Russell, Magic, Wilt, and of course, MJ.

Wilt didn't win enough and when he won the 2nd time he didn't dominate like som of these other GOAT-candidates.

[lilgodfather1]

Kareem wasn't even the best player on his team.

[RRR3]

Wilt didn't win enough and when he won the 2nd time he didn't dominate like som of these other GOAT-candidates.
:rolleyes: Wilt>>>Russell

[bstickq1]

So being on championship teams makes you go up 114 spots on the all time list? :roll: I suppose Robert Horry is a HOF then.
In my opinion, both championships AND stats don't really mean a damn thing when determining how great a player is.

For example, what if MJ was playing in a game 7 and scored a shot to put his team up by 1 with 10 seconds left. If, say, Karl Malone hits a shot at the buzzer to win the series, does that make MJ a worse player?

No, that's dumb, even if he has one less championship.

Duncan isn't a worse player because Fisher hit a miracle shot. Iverson isn't a worse player because Shaq and LAL destroyed them.

Watching a player play throughout a game is really the only way, from the opening tip to pressure situations in the fourth, factoring in the plays being called, the offense being run, the tailored defensive schemes, and the players around them.

There are some great ass players that haven't achieved a damn thing in this league as far as winning, with some ridiculous skillsets. If I wanted to describe in detail what MJ could do that prime Mcgrady, Kobe, or Wade couldn't that would show obviously that he is the better player, I couldn't. The simple fact is they all have a ridiculously expansive skillset. I must reiterate after this statement, stats don't mean jack shit.

So if someone believes, and hold your breath here, that prime McGrady is the best player of all time, I don't see a problem with that (I'm not saying the person I'm quoting believes this, heh). The talent level of him and the other top wing players, including MJ, are so high and comparable that it would be like eyeballing the Sears Tower in Chicago, flying to New York, and then eyeballing the Empire State Building to determine which is the tallest.

Of course comments like that would give pretty much everyone on here a heart attack.

[RRR3]

In my opinion, both championships AND stats don't really mean a damn thing when determining how great a player is.

For example, what if MJ was playing in a game 7 and scored a shot to put his team up by 1 with 10 seconds left. If, say, Karl Malone hits a shot at the buzzer to win the series, does that make MJ a worse player?

No, that's dumb, even if he has one less championship.

Duncan isn't a worse player because Fisher hit a miracle shot. Iverson isn't a worse player because Shaq and LAL destroyed them.

Watching a player play throughout a game is really the only way, from the opening tip to pressure situations in the fourth, factoring in the plays being called, the offense being run, the tailored defensive schemes, and the players around them.

There are some great ass players that haven't achieved a damn thing in this league as far as winning, with some ridiculous skillsets. If I wanted to describe in detail what MJ could do that prime Mcgrady, Kobe, or Wade couldn't that would show obviously that he is the better player, I couldn't. The simple fact is they all have a ridiculously expansive skillset. I must reiterate after this statement, stats don't mean jack shit.

So if someone believes, and hold your breath here, that prime McGrady is the best player of all time, I don't see a problem with that (I'm not saying the person I'm quoting believes this, heh). The talent level of him and the other top wing players, including with MJ, are so high and comparable that it would be like eyeballing the Sears Tower in Chicago, flying to New York, and then eyeballing the Empire State Building to determine which is the tallest.

Of course comments like that would give pretty much everyone on here a heart attack.
Excellent post. :cheers: :applause:
And while prime T-Mac wasn't the GOAT, T-Mac could have been the GOAT IMO or at least 2nd to MJ. I really believe that.

[Odinn]

Kareem wasn't even the best player on his team.
:facepalm :facepalm

[ThaRegul8r]

Wilt didn't win enough and when he won the 2nd time he didn't dominate like som of these other GOAT-candidates.

Spoken by someone who evidently doesn't know anything about the 1971-72 season.

Agenda-driven people are annoying. Zealots/stans and bashers both. Their agendas blind them to any semblance of objectivity.

[pauk]

because he was not a flashy perimeter player......

[D-Wade316]

Wilt>Kareem

[D-Wade316]

Wilt blocks Skyhook of Kareem (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYq4CWeWaKg)

[Sarcastic]

Because he is not as good as Jordan.

[Sarcastic]

Wilt blocks Skyhook of Kareem (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYq4CWeWaKg)

X 2

[D-Wade316]

Let this thread be a reminder that Wilt>>>Kareem

[PTB Fan]

You can argue Kareem all day long.

His accomplishments are second to none. He was one of the greatest offensive forces, most dominant, physically imposing players with one of the most complete games ever...then throw in the great prime play, longetivity, greatness etc..

He's got a good case

[JellyBean]

How come? For me it comes down to media and time frame that he played. Kareem was never liked by the media, and Jordan was. Kareem played when the NBA was not like it is now, wall-to wall coverage, and well liked. I just think that it comes down to media and time frame.

[Collie]

His best years came during the NBA's least talented stretch (due to the NBA-ABA split).

[guy]

So if someone believes, and hold your breath here, that prime McGrady is the best player of all time, I don't see a problem with that (I'm not saying the person I'm quoting believes this, heh). The talent level of him and the other top wing players, including MJ, are so high and comparable that it would be like eyeballing the Sears Tower in Chicago, flying to New York, and then eyeballing the Empire State Building to determine which is the tallest.


I'm pretty sure the Sears Tower is clearly taller then the Empire State Building, so I'm not sure thats a great analogy.

[guy]

Excellent post. :cheers: :applause:
And while prime T-Mac wasn't the GOAT, T-Mac could have been the GOAT IMO or at least 2nd to MJ. I really believe that.

Based on what? Athleticism and skillset? Sure. But he didn't have anywhere close to the mentality, work ethic, competitiveness, determination, and desire as the the best of the best were. If he had that, then sure. But thats just like saying "If AI was 7 inches taller he would've been GOAT." It doesn't really mean much cause T-Mac was still missing something huge. Both AI and T-Mac are my favorite players ever after Jordan, but I can't deny this.

[jlip]

His best years came during the NBA's least talented stretch (due to the NBA-ABA split).

I honestly think that the presence of the ABA diminished the level of guard/ wing player competition in the NBA as opposed to the big man. IMO, Kareem's best years came during an era which saw arguably the deepest and most talented pool of centers in the history of the league. Kareem's first 4 seasons were played against 60's greats who were still dominating in some capacity such as Wilt, Thurmond, Bellamy, and Reed. The remainder of the 70's had him competing against the likes of Lanier, Walton, Cowens, Unseld, Gilmore, etc. and he was still considered the best player in the game. Keep in mind that from '70-'76 there were less than 20 teams in the league and he faced many of these players more times than players see each other today in a 30 team league.

As an interesting aside, I don't think that Kareem's defensive dominance is discussed enough. Sometime ago, (ThaRegul8r I think) mentioned that Kareem was the anchor of a Bucks team that allowed the lowest fg% in the league for a few seasons. For most of the 70's he was at worst a top 5 rebounder in the league, even winning a rebounding title in '76. He has 4 blocks titles (I think that may be tied for most in league history with Mark Eaton.) That's very impressive considering the fact that blocks were not counted during his first 4 seasons. Although I do believe he would have had problems beating out Wilt in the seasons that their careers overlapped. Finally, he could possibly have had the most all defensive 1st team selections if there were two spots for centers as there are for forwards and guards.

[RRR3]

Based on what? Athleticism and skillset? Sure. But he didn't have anywhere close to the mentality, work ethic, competitiveness, determination, and desire as the the best of the best were. If he had that, then sure. But thats just like saying "If AI was 7 inches taller he would've been GOAT." It doesn't really mean much cause T-Mac was still missing something huge. Both AI and T-Mac are my favorite players ever after Jordan, but I can't deny this.
I meant he had GOAT level talent, dude. I never said it was likely he was going to be the GOAT (he would have had to do his 2002-03 season every year for him to be in the discussion)

[bizil]

Well when it comes to MJ he has just as many rings as Kareem. MJ has one less MVP award. MJ has six Finals MVP's. He has 10 scoring titles. But MJ is arguably the most athletic, the best scorer, best midrange, best defender, best passer, and best rebounder EVER at the SG. He combined Dr. J-David Thompson level athletic ability and combined it with an epic all around of guys like West and Big O in a 6'6 body. And is the most popular athlete ever who transcended sports and changed the marketing game. You got Ali, Ruth, Jim Brown, and MJ. Those four guys were so ahead of their time, talented, and mythical that it dictates them being GOAT.

But Kareem in my book transformed the center position and is the second greatest player of all time. There had never been a guy 7'2 with the skill and grace of Kareem at center. Even to this day. People also underestimate Kareem's athletic ability. But as great as Kareem was, he didn't dominate every facet of center play historically the way MJ dominated the SG. For example, Wilt is a better rebounder, Hakeem is more athletic, Russell is a better defender, Ewing a better midrange shot. But Kareem held his own and was one of the greats in all those areas. So I know it's grasping at straws, but these reasons put MJ ahead of Kareem slightly. And I say slightly cause Kareem's resume doesn't take a backseat to anybody. And he revolutionized the center position. U see guys similar to MJ in Kobe and Wade in terms of style of play and ability. There is NO CENTER remotely close to Kareem's blend of size at 7'2 and skill. And Kareem's longevity being a great player is probably the best of all time. He was finals MVP at 37 years old. His first All Star Game had Wilt Chamberlain in it. His last had guys like Hakeem and Ewing. That goes to show the longevity of Kareem. Hell he won rings with the two greatest PG's of all time in Magic and Big O. That's crazy to think that he was teammates of both guys and was the number one option on most of those teams.

[G.O.A.T]

To me it was his approach to the game.

His career would have been a lot more impressive I believe had he gone all out at all times. He'd probably have retired in 1985 or so, but i think he'd have as least 7-8 Championships to his credit as an elite player instead of four and two as a role player.

Had Kareem approached the game like Jordan or Russell, I'm not sure anyone could have stopped him. He's just as skilled as MJ, just as smart as Russell. His combined size and athleticism are equally if not more spectacular. He had the greatest most unstoppable move in NBA history and was capable and willing (usually) to adjust to players around him.

The difference is in what he made of his opportunities versus what those other guys made of theirs. With the MJ or Russell approach there is no way Kareem's teams come up short in '74 or '84. I don't think rosters as talented as the '78, '79 or '81 Lakers go 0-3 in their bids for titles either, certainly that attitude would at least lead to one.

Basically Kareem, like all NBA players besides Russell and Jordan came up short on a lot of opportunities to win titles. MJ and Russell never really did. They squeezed as much out of what they had around them as possible, that's what matters most to me.

[bizil]

I honestly think that the presence of the ABA diminished the level of guard/ wing player competition in the NBA as opposed to the big man. IMO, Kareem's best years came during an era which saw arguably the deepest and most talented pool of centers in the history of the league. Kareem's first 4 seasons were played against 60's greats who were still dominating in some capacity such as Wilt, Thurmond, Bellamy, and Reed. The remainder of the 70's had him competing against the likes of Lanier, Walton, Cowens, Unseld, Gilmore, etc. and he was still considered the best player in the game. Keep in mind that from '70-'76 there were less than 20 teams in the league and he faced many of these players more times than players see each other today in a 30 team league.

As an interesting aside, I don't think that Kareem's defensive dominance is discussed enough. Sometime ago, (ThaRegul8r I think) mentioned that Kareem was the anchor of a Bucks team that allowed the lowest fg% in the league for a few seasons. For most of the 70's he was at worst a top 5 rebounder in the league, even winning a rebounding title in '76. He has 4 blocks titles (I think that may be tied for most in league history with Mark Eaton.) That's very impressive considering the fact that blocks were not counted during his first 4 seasons. Although I do believe he would have had problems beating out Wilt in the seasons that their careers overlapped. Finally, he could possibly have had the most all defensive 1st team selections if there were two spots for centers as there are for forwards and guards.

Great point about the ABA and their wings. Doc, Gervin, and Thompson went to the NBA and redefined the SF and SG positions. When they hit the NBA, all three shot to the top of those positions in the NBA. U can see the influence of all three guys games even today. The NBA had seen NOTHING like those three guys before.

[guy]

To me it was his approach to the game.

His career would have been a lot more impressive I believe had he gone all out at all times. He'd probably have retired in 1985 or so, but i think he'd have as least 7-8 Championships to his credit as an elite player instead of four and two as a role player.

Had Kareem approached the game like Jordan or Russell, I'm not sure anyone could have stopped him. He's just as skilled as MJ, just as smart as Russell. His combined size and athleticism are equally if not more spectacular. He had the greatest most unstoppable move in NBA history and was capable and willing (usually) to adjust to players around him.

The difference is in what he made of his opportunities versus what those other guys made of theirs. With the MJ or Russell approach there is no way Kareem's teams come up short in '74 or '84. I don't think rosters as talented as the '78, '79 or '81 Lakers go 0-3 in their bids for titles either, certainly that attitude would at least lead to one.

Basically Kareem, like all NBA players besides Russell and Jordan came up short on a lot of opportunities to win titles. MJ and Russell never really did. They squeezed as much out of what they had around them as possible, that's what matters most to me.

I'm not sure if I'm thinking about something else, but I remember reading a quote from him where he implied that he was really only playing for the money. Do you know what I'm talking about? He could've been joking, but I don't know. He obviously wasn't considered the joking type.

[ThaSwagg3r]

Based on what? Athleticism and skillset? Sure. But he didn't have anywhere close to the mentality, work ethic, competitiveness, determination, and desire as the the best of the best were. If he had that, then sure. But thats just like saying "If AI was 7 inches taller he would've been GOAT." It doesn't really mean much cause T-Mac was still missing something huge. Both AI and T-Mac are my favorite players ever after Jordan, but I can't deny this.
He is a LeBron/Tmac fan.....intangibles and mental aspect is non-existent to him.


http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=233163
:oldlol:

[RRR3]

He is a LeBron/Tmac fan.....intangibles and mental aspect is non-existent to him.


:oldlol:
Man every time I post anything about LBJ/T-Mac you get creepily excited because you are delusional and think you can prove me wrong...
http://www.issues.cc/uploads/62691136510.jpg

[pauk]

He is a LeBron/Tmac fan..... intangibles and mental aspect is non-existent to him.


:oldlol:

wtf does lebron have to do with t-mac in that department you ignorant troll? wtf does lebron have to do with t-mac at all.... t-mac was just a shotjacker with less rebounding/passing/hustle/heart/work ethic/bball iq & DEFENSE......

who the hell has better work ethic, intangibles and "mental aspect" than Lebron today? tell me....? kobe right? damn kobetard....

[ThaSwagg3r]

who the hell has better work ethic, intangibles and "mental aspect" than Lebron today? tell me....? kobe right? damn kobetard....
About every player in the league does.

[Soothing Layup]

This is what separates Jordan from Kareem in my opinion.

6/6 Finals MVP
2/6 Finals MVP

/Thread.

[Odinn]

This is what separates Jordan from Kareem in my opinion.

6/6 Finals MVP
2/6 Finals MVP

/Thread.
Kareem won 3 and a half times as the man; 71-80(he was the real FMVP)-82, the half one 85.

FMVP awards just for a series, not for an entire playoff run.

Kareem has the 2nd strongest case for goat conversation and surely he can be called goat.

[Friday]

Kareem wasn't even the best player on his team.
Yeah at the twilight of his career....

[The Iron Fist]

This is what separates Jordan from Kareem in my opinion.

6/6 Finals MVP
2/6 Finals MVP

/Thread.


Heres where the real separation begins.

Kareem 3 straight NCAA titles 3 time Most Outstanding Player awards
3 straight NYC titles

Jordan 1 NCAA title 1 player of the year award.
Cut from the jv team

[zay_24]

Kareem isnt even the greatest laker of alltime, Bean snatched that up:applause: :applause:

[tontoz]

Kareem certainly has a legit case for GOAT. The problem for him is that he wasn't as exciting a player as Jordan and the NBA wasn't getting as much exposure when he was a young player.

He got most of his media exposure when he was with the 80s Lakers and had already been in the league a long time. Remember that he was drafted in '69 after playing 4 years of college. He was in his 30s when Magic was drafted.

[ThaRegul8r]

Kareem certainly has a legit case for GOAT. The problem for him is that he wasn't as exciting a player as Jordan

"Excitingness" is subjective, and shouldn't factor into the equation. Different people will differ in what they find "exciting." Then it becomes nothing more than "who I like the most" = "greatest." There are other arguments one can make without reducing it to something completely subjective.

[GS1905]

No offense to OP but Jordan shits on Kareem. Kareem played in a weak era. I, GS1905, know basketball better than anyone on this board. Don't mess with me or I'll shit on you with my knowledge.

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTDje7RRfIJxVY1QiC3aQ04oA7s9SorX LPjVeYFDC1THFXArCt3NQ

[DMV2]

No offense to OP but Jordan shits on Kareem. Kareem played in a weak era. I, GS1905, know basketball better than anyone on this board. Don't mess with me or I'll shit on you with my knowledge.

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTDje7RRfIJxVY1QiC3aQ04oA7s9SorX LPjVeYFDC1THFXArCt3NQ
:wtf: You are the OP...

[ThaRegul8r]

No offense to OP but Jordan shits on Kareem. Kareem played in a weak era. I, GS1905, know basketball better than anyone on this board. Don't mess with me or I'll shit on you with my knowledge.

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTDje7RRfIJxVY1QiC3aQ04oA7s9SorX LPjVeYFDC1THFXArCt3NQ

:wtf: You are the OP...


-6x Championships
-2x Finals MVP (Should've been more because he deserved it more than Magic in some years)
-6x Regular Season MVP
-19x All-Star Game
-10x All Nba First Team
-5x All Nba Second Team
-5x All Defensive First Team
-6x All Defensive Second Team
-Rookie of the year
-1x All Rookie Team
-3x NCAA Men's Basketball Champion
-NCAA Basketball Tournament MOP
-Most points made (38387)
-Unguardable hook shot
-Longevity


How come Kareem isn't Goat?

:oldlol:

And he just created this thread yesterday. Apparently there's something wrong with his short-term memory.

[tontoz]

:wtf: You are the OP...


:roll:






http://www.readthesmiths.com/articles/Images/Humor/Fail/fail-dogfood.jpg

[tontoz]

"Excitingness" is subjective, and shouldn't factor into the equation. Different people will differ in what they find "exciting." Then it becomes nothing more than "who I like the most" = "greatest." There are other arguments one can make without reducing it to something completely subjective.


Picking the GOAT is also subjective. No matter how you look at it the bottom line is that it will be someone's opinion no matter what they base it on.

[ThaRegul8r]

"Excitingness" is subjective, and shouldn't factor into the equation. Different people will differ in what they find "exciting." Then it becomes nothing more than "who I like the most" = "greatest." There are other arguments one can make without reducing it to something completely subjective.

Picking the GOAT is also subjective. No matter how you look at it the bottom line is that it will be someone's opinion no matter what they base it on.

It is possible to have objective criteria which one has established by which one has arrived at whomever they've chosen as GOAT, just as it is possible for it to be based on nothing at all, or simply conforming with "the majority."

[Da_Realist]

:wtf: You are the OP...

:oldlol:

[GS1905]

:wtf: You are the OP...

That's why I said no offense. Otherwise I would say fak you OP

[tontoz]

It is possible to have objective criteria which one has established by which one has arrived at whomever they've chosen as GOAT, just as it is possible for it to be based on nothing at all, or simply conforming with "the majority."


Do the opinions you see on this message board generally seem objective to you? We are talking about fans here, not robots. Just look at the All-Star voting.

[tontoz]

That's why I said no offense. Otherwise I would say fak you OP


I think it might be time for a checkup from the neck up.

[GS1905]

I think it might be time for a checkup from the neck up.

fak off madafaka. Dont be jealous

[ThaRegul8r]

Do the opinions you see on this message board generally seem objective to you?

No, as a matter of fact they don't. "Most people" are agenda-driven, and it's pathetic.


We are talking about fans here, not robots.

Arriving at a conclusion in an objective manner =/= "being a robot." If that's your "opinion," then that's a matter of your own faulty erroneous belief.

[iamgine]

Kareem wasn't GOAT because he played with Magic Johnson, not Scottie Pippen.

[Pointguard]

My problem with Kareem is that he had an inspiration deficit problem before Magic. He, like Shaq, coasted a bit and didn't claim his dominance in a big way. The killer instinct wasn't there before Magic. I definitely think GOAT was in his reach but he definitely didn't resolutely grab it and say I am the pinnacle of the game. Before Magic you definitely wondered if Yoga and Karate had sapped his love for the game - or that the game didn't have enough meaning to exhaust his heart into it. After Magic, KAJ was tuned into winning.

Russ and MJ had the killer instinct. Wilt had done the unimaginable, KAJ could have had 20 phenomenal years which would have been hard to beat in GOAT convo, but the 70's wasn't his and they could have been but he played like he was distracted. I think he still has a great case for those who are not crazy about using championships as a top two criteria for GOAT. For myself, Magic was a codependent for him winning, and perhaps, a superior winner. KAJ BM (before Magic) in a weak era and AM (after Magic) in a great era is too much of a story to miss if you are heavy into the winning criteria.

[kaiiu]

kareem aint even the best K in the top 10.

[winwin]

*
- Jordan had better casts around him during his prime years than Kareem did

- Russell>>>Jordan in winning rings as the best player.
Jordan 6's>Kareem's 6. What about the other 14 seasons Kareem played and Jordan's other 10 (counting 95' since he had a shot to win a ring that year)? That is where the separation occurs. Kareem won all the time, dragged horrible teams to respectability. Jordan's record outside a relatively brief period is pedestrian as far as winning goes. While Jordan's 6>Kareem's 6, Kareem>>>Jordan in winning.

- Kareem. Kareem took a 27 win team to 56 wins and the ECF as a rookie--before past his prime Oscar showed up.

- Jordan improved the team from 27 wins to 38 wins (the lowest increase of any top 9 of all-time player).

- Shaq dragged a 21 win team to 41 wins before Penny. If Shaq could do it why couldn't MJ?

- Let me know when Jordan sniffs a season as great statistically as 35/17/5/5 (on a 63 win team too)

- KAJ played against 37 of the NBAs 50 greatest players and still amassed tons of awards and stats. Think about that, he played against over half of the NBAs greatest players.
In comparison, Jordan played against, a whopping 14. Thats less than 25%.

- Kareem's win totals by year: (inheriting a 27 win expansion team) 56, 66, 63, 60, 58, 38*, 40, 53, 45, 47, 60, 54, 57, 58, 54, 62, 62, 65, 62, 57

Fact: Having 18 winning seasons in 19 years>10 winning seasons in 14 years


Fact: Being the NBA finals half the time>38%
Fact: Being in the conference finals 70% of the time>50%
Fact: 57 wins on average>49 on average


- Kareem averaged 36/18 in the first playoff series he ever played in as a ROOKIE. Closed out the first team he faced with a 46 pts, 25 rbs, countless blocks (to lead a comeback win in fourth quarter).

- Nike, Stern. ESPN, Hanes, Wheaties, Gatorade, etc helped him push the game to have worldwide appeal through mass marketing.


*from Kareem the GOAT thread


-

[D-Wade316]

Kareem ain't even the best center of all-time. How can he even be GOAT?

[Odinn]

Kareem ain't even the best center of all-time. How can he even be GOAT?
:facepalm

[D-Wade316]

:facepalm
:facepalm
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=170340

A 34yrs old Wilt fought Prime Kareem to a standstill. What would a Prime Wilt do to Kareem?

[madmax]

because he was not a flashy perimeter player......

this...Big men will never get the same amount of respect even if they are far more impactful on court than flashy wingmen. That's the way it goes since Space Jam generation took over sadly...

[LebronairJAMES]

Kareem wasn't GOAT because he played with Magic Johnson, not Scottie Pippen.
http://i.imgur.com/KNWKm.gif

[ThaRegul8r]

because he was not a flashy perimeter player......

this...Big men will never get the same amount of respect even if they are far more impactful on court than flashy wingmen. That's the way it goes since Space Jam generation took over sadly...

And it's not like the NBA itself has itself shown bias, displaying a preference toward flashy wingmen over big men... specifically changing the rules in order to benefit the former and inhibit the latter or anything.


Another factor in the new style of play has been a falloff in the number of dominant centers either in the league or on the way, which makes small ball even more appealing to teams.

"Do I ever expect a guy as a low-post player to average 26 or 27 points? No way," said Houston's Jeff Van Gundy, who coaches 7-6 center Yao Ming. "Because of the new rules and because of the great defense played in this league, the post game is the hardest game to play now. It's brutal.

"That's why there are very few teams that really play post-up basketball. The post game, by nature, is slower and more methodical because it takes some misdirection or ball reversal, spacing and entry passes to get it inside."

[tontoz]

No, as a matter of fact they don't. "Most people" are agenda-driven, and it's pathetic.

Arriving at a conclusion in an objective manner =/= "being a robot." If that's your "opinion," then that's a matter of your own faulty erroneous belief.


Which works against Kareem. That is exactly my point. If everyone thought objectively then the fan appeal of Jordan's style of play vs Kareem's wouldn't carry any weight.

But this planet isn't Vulcan.






http://www.todayifoundout.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/Spock_vulcan-salute.png

[G.O.A.T]

Which works against Kareem. That is exactly my point. If everyone thought objectively then the fan appeal of Jordan's style of play vs Kareem's wouldn't carry any weight.


What about someone like me who thinks Jordan is better than Kareem for reasons of substance, not style?

[Odinn]

:facepalm
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=170340

A 34yrs old Wilt fought Prime Kareem to a standstill. What would a Prime Wilt do to Kareem?
:facepalm :facepalm

Kareem has the strongest case to be called goat center and 2nd strongest case to be called goat player.

Also Wilt can be called goat player or goat center. Bt Acting like Kareem has no case; :facepalm :facepalm

[The Iron Fist]

My problem with Kareem is that he had an inspiration deficit problem before Magic. He, like Shaq, coasted a bit and didn't claim his dominance in a big way. The killer instinct wasn't there before Magic. I definitely think GOAT was in his reach but he definitely didn't resolutely grab it and say I am the pinnacle of the game. Before Magic you definitely wondered if Yoga and Karate had sapped his love for the game - or that the game didn't have enough meaning to exhaust his heart into it. After Magic, KAJ was tuned into winning.

Russ and MJ had the killer instinct. Wilt had done the unimaginable, KAJ could have had 20 phenomenal years which would have been hard to beat in GOAT convo, but the 70's wasn't his and they could have been but he played like he was distracted. I think he still has a great case for those who are not crazy about using championships as a top two criteria for GOAT. For myself, Magic was a codependent for him winning, and perhaps, a superior winner. KAJ BM (before Magic) in a weak era and AM (after Magic) in a great era is too much of a story to miss if you are heavy into the winning criteria.


He had an inspiration problem before Magic?



Before Magic
9 time all star
5 time MVP
Finals MVP
9 time all NBA
8 time all defensive
5 time most field goals made
2 time most total rebounds
3 times most blocks
3 time most points
2 time most points per game
4 time most blocks per game
8 time highest PER * for the geeks who love this stat




You're going to have to actually do some research if you truly believe that Kareem had a problem with inspiration.

Its odd that you mention Kareem needed Magic, when its Magic who never won without Kareem in the NBA.

[jlauber]

Its odd that you mention Kareem needed Magic, when its Magic who never won without Kareem in the NBA.

TECHNICALLY, that is true. In REALITY, Magic DID win a title in '88 DESPITE Kareem. Jabbar was probably no more than the FIFTH best player on that team, and he had a poor post-season, with an AWFUL Finals ( 13.1 ppg, 4.1 rpg, and .413 FG%...with as bad a game seven as any HOF player has ever played.) In fact, I would argue that the '87 Lakers were so good, that they likely would have won a title without Kareem that season, and with Thompson and Green absorbing his minutes.

Furthermore, in Kareem's last season, the Lakers went 57-25. The very next season, Magic took them to a 63-19 record, which was LA's SECOND best mark in the decade of the 80's. And then following that season, Magic took an injury-riddled team that was already on the decline, to a 58-24 record, and yet another Finals.

BUT, when Magic retired, the Lakers immediately plummetted to a 43-39 record, and then followed that up with an even worse 39-43 record.

By contrast, Kareem's Lakers, pre-Magic, were not much more than average...even with some very talented rosters. However, in Magic's rookie season, they immediately went 60-22 and won a title.

Kareem's lone title before Magic? It came in a season in which his 66-16 Bucks probably the easiest road to a title in NBA history. They defeated a 41-41 Warrior team in the first round. Then, in the WCF's, they beat a 48-34 Laker team that was without BOTH West and Baylor. And in the Finals, they swept a 42-40 Bullets team.

[cteach111]

there is no GOAT. I've learned that many posters here pick MJ mostly on subjectivity. That's mostly due to era bias.

MJ's status will fade over time eventually to the point that people will start judging him a tad more reasonably than they do now. It will become more of a pick'em between him, Kareem, & Russell.

I think MJ probably has the strongest argument from an accomplishment/accolades standpoint though. He was basically the guy that played both sides of the ball at an extremely high level as a #1 option and won playing that style of ball the longest.

As far as peak goes however, that's far more difficult to come to a case-closed conclusion.

[cteach111]

No, as a matter of fact they don't. "Most people" are agenda-driven, and it's pathetic.


It's quite disturbing really..

[D-Wade316]

:facepalm :facepalm

Kareem has the strongest case to be called goat center and 2nd strongest case to be called goat player.

Also Wilt can be called goat player or goat center. Bt Acting like Kareem has no case; :facepalm :facepalm
3rd. Not 2nd for GOAT
2nd for GOAT center.

Wilt>Kareem

[Odinn]

3rd. Not 2nd for GOAT
2nd for GOAT center.

Wilt>Kareem
Saying Wilt > Kareem can be. But it's not certain. Just stop trolling for Wilt.

[The Iron Fist]

TECHNICALLY, that is true. In REALITY, Magic DID win a title in '88 DESPITE Kareem. Jabbar was probably no more than the FIFTH best player on that team, and he had a poor post-season, with an AWFUL Finals ( 13.1 ppg, 4.1 rpg, and .413 FG%...with as bad a game seven as any HOF player has ever played.) In fact, I would argue that the '87 Lakers were so good, that they likely would have won a title without Kareem that season, and with Thompson and Green absorbing his minutes.

Furthermore, in Kareem's last season, the Lakers went 57-25. The very next season, Magic took them to a 63-19 record, which was LA's SECOND best mark in the decade of the 80's. And then following that season, Magic took an injury-riddled team that was already on the decline, to a 58-24 record, and yet another Finals.

BUT, when Magic retired, the Lakers immediately plummetted to a 43-39 record, and then followed that up with an even worse 39-43 record.

By contrast, Kareem's Lakers, pre-Magic, were not much more than average...even with some very talented rosters. However, in Magic's rookie season, they immediately went 60-22 and won a title.

Kareem's lone title before Magic? It came in a season in which his 66-16 Bucks probably the easiest road to a title in NBA history. They defeated a 41-41 Warrior team in the first round. Then, in the WCF's, they beat a 48-34 Laker team that was without BOTH West and Baylor. And in the Finals, they swept a 42-40 Bullets team.


Sorry, but Kareem was a part of that team and its starting center.

Magic, nor Oscar have diddly squat without the GOAT. Your efforts to diminish Kareems impact to his teams, has failed. Again.

[The Iron Fist]

TECHNICALLY, that is true. In REALITY, Magic DID win a title in '88 DESPITE Kareem. Jabbar was probably no more than the FIFTH best player on that team, and he had a poor post-season, with an AWFUL Finals ( 13.1 ppg, 4.1 rpg, and .413 FG%...with as bad a game seven as any HOF player has ever played.) In fact, I would argue that the '87 Lakers were so good, that they likely would have won a title without Kareem that season, and with Thompson and Green absorbing his minutes.

Furthermore, in Kareem's last season, the Lakers went 57-25. The very next season, Magic took them to a 63-19 record, which was LA's SECOND best mark in the decade of the 80's. And then following that season, Magic took an injury-riddled team that was already on the decline, to a 58-24 record, and yet another Finals.

BUT, when Magic retired, the Lakers immediately plummetted to a 43-39 record, and then followed that up with an even worse 39-43 record.

By contrast, Kareem's Lakers, pre-Magic, were not much more than average...even with some very talented rosters. However, in Magic's rookie season, they immediately went 60-22 and won a title.

Kareem's lone title before Magic? It came in a season in which his 66-16 Bucks probably the easiest road to a title in NBA history. They defeated a 41-41 Warrior team in the first round. Then, in the WCF's, they beat a 48-34 Laker team that was without BOTH West and Baylor. And in the Finals, they swept a 42-40 Bullets team.


Sorry, but Kareem was a part of that team and its starting center.

Magic, nor Oscar have diddly squat without the GOAT. Your efforts to diminish Kareems impact to his teams, has failed. Again.

[The Iron Fist]

there is no GOAT. I've learned that many posters here pick MJ mostly on subjectivity. That's mostly due to era bias.

MJ's status will fade over time eventually to the point that people will start judging him a tad more reasonably than they do now. It will become more of a pick'em between him, Kareem, & Russell.

I think MJ probably has the strongest argument from an accomplishment/accolades standpoint though. He was basically the guy that played both sides of the ball at an extremely high level as a #1 option and won playing that style of ball the longest.

As far as peak goes however, that's far more difficult to come to a case-closed conclusion.


Kareem didn't play both sides of the ball?

:roll:

[Big164]

Kareem's Lakers got swept by Bill Walton in 77.

The next two years Kareem gets the awesome Adrian Dantley and still cant make a single finals game.

Dantley is not good enough, Kareem needs a top 5 all time guard like Oscar or Magic. anything below that and he's ringless.

[magnax1]

Here's why I have Russell, Jordan and Wilt over Kareem
First off, despite the fact that he played in one of what I consider the two eras in the NBA ever (73-77, and 98-03) and having teams worthy of at least going deep quite often, the only years he really had success were 77, 74, 72 and 71. However I feel he should've been much more successful in a few years. One year in specifically, 79, was pretty bad. He did not play nearly as well as he did in 1980, and if he did I have to feel they could have at minimum made the Finals.
The second reason is, I don't feel he was as good as his statistics would suggest in his early seasons. He put up crazy stats, but then ended up not being able to play at 100% against Wilt or Thurmond, and at times was even outplayed by them (though very rarely)

[Odinn]

Kareem's Lakers got swept by Bill Walton in 77.

The next two years Kareem gets the awesome Adrian Dantley and still cant make a single finals game.

Dantley is not good enough, Kareem needs a top 5 all time guard like Oscar or Magic. anything below that and he's ringless.
Magic didn't win without Kareem.
Jordan didn't win without Pippen. (top 5 or top 10 SF ever)
Shaq didn't win without Kobe/Wade. (Kobe surely top 3 guard of all-time and Wade can be named top5 SG ever.)

That would go on.

Also Kareem outplayed Walton in that series. You can search and find that thread in ISH.

[Big164]

Magic didn't win without Kareem.
Jordan didn't win without Pippen. (top 5 or top 10 SF ever)
Shaq didn't win without Kobe/Wade. (Kobe surely top 3 guard of all-time and Wade can be named top5 SG ever.)

That would go on.

Also Kareem outplayed Walton in that series. You can search and find that thread in ISH.

Russell bird and mj do not have team mates in the top 10 let alone the top 5.

[Odinn]

Russell bird and mj do not have team mates in the top 10 let alone the top 5.
Bird; Kevin McHale one of the top 10 PF ever without a doubt.
Jordan; Pippen one of the top 10 SF ever without a doubt.
Russell; Cousy one of top 10 PG ever, Havlicek top 10 SF ever - arguably top 5-7.

:facepalm :facepalm

[Big164]

Bird; Kevin McHale one of the top 10 PF ever without a doubt.
Jordan; Pippen one of the top 10 SF ever without a doubt.
Russell; Cousy one of top 10 PG ever, Havlicek top 10 SF ever - arguably top 5-7.

:facepalm :facepalm
Stop covering for Kareem.

Magic is #1 pg, top 5 player overall.

Oscar is #2 pg, top 12 player overall.

[Odinn]

Stop covering for Kareem.

Magic is #1 pg, top 5 player overall.

Oscar is #2 pg, top 12 player overall.
I'm not covering Kareem. Showing your arguments not valid.

Kareem won in '71 with Big O who was not in his prime.

Kareem won in '80, he carried the Lakers and he the one who would have that 1980 FMVP.

Kareem won in '82, he had equal impact with Magic. (see Kareem or Magic.. Who had the most impact on the lakers? thread.)

At his 38, he won the FMVP and he deserved it. He averaged 26/9/5 against R. Parish.


Oscar's before 1971 seasons made him top 15 player ever. Not '71.


Russell and Jordan the only ones won 5 or more times as the man.

Duncan - 4 times
Kareem - 3 times
Bird - 3 times
Magic - 3 times
Shaq - 3 times
Kobe - 2 times
Hakeem - 2 times
Wilt - 2 times

Jordan has the strongest case to be NBA goat. Kareem and Jordan, both of them have the strongest cases to be basketball goat due to Kareem's longevity and college career.:cheers:

[G.O.A.T]

I'm not covering Kareem. Showing your arguments not valid.

Kareem won in '71 with Big O who was not in his prime.

This is another example of an invalid argument. Oscar was an all-NBA pick and 5th in the MVP voting in 1971. That was still his prime. The only number that went down was his coring average and that was because he shot less on a team where he was the #2 option.


Kareem won in '80, he carried the Lakers and he the one who would have that 1980 FMVP.

Except he got hurt and Magic stole the show and sealed the deal. If Magic gets hurt there is no way of knowing if he Lakers still win that series.


Kareem won in '82, he had equal impact with Magic. (see Kareem or Magic.. Who had the most impact on the lakers? thread.)

Actually, wrong here too. Magic finished ahead of Kareem in the MVP voting, made all-NBA whereas Kareem did not, and Magic got the coach fired who ran a system that favored Kareem and replaced him with Riley who opened things up for Erv.


At his 38, he won the FMVP and he deserved it. He averaged 26/9/5 against R. Parish.

This one is correct. But Magic was the teams best player. This is the inverse of 1980.



Oscar's before 1971 seasons made him top 15 player ever. Not '71.

And the 11 seasons in which Kareem won two titles made him a top 5 player, not the three other rings he won past his prime.




Russell and Jordan the only ones won 5 or more times as the man.

Duncan - 4 times
Kareem - 3 times
Bird - 3 times
Magic - 3 times
Shaq - 3 times
Kobe - 2 times
Hakeem - 2 times
Wilt - 2 times

Jordan has the strongest case to be NBA goat. Kareem and Jordan, both of them have the strongest cases to be basketball goat due to Kareem's longevity and college career.:cheers:

You have to move Kareem down to 2. 1982 he was not the man, not at all. All the events of that season show explicitly that Magic was the best player on that team and the focus.

[Odinn]

I didn't count 1982 as the man for Kareem. 1982 and 1985 titles exceptional success for anyone if pay attention to Kareem's age. I count these 2 titles as 1 as the man.

[G.O.A.T]

I didn't count 1982 as the man for Kareem. 1982 and 1985 titles exceptional success for anyone if pay attention to Kareem's age. I count these 2 titles as 1 as the man.

You should make that clear, to me it's bogus, but I get what you're saying.

Also if that's the way you're doing it, Shaq needs to have 3 1/2...

[Odinn]

This one is correct. But Magic was the teams best player. This is the inverse of 1980.
Also, that's not the exact inverse of 1980. Kareem was the best Laker in the playoffs in general and in the NBA Finals.
Magic was the best Laker in the playoffs in general. But in the NBA Finals Kareem was the best Laker, arguably.

[Rose]

Because Kareem is overrated, lazy, and only cared about winning half the time.

See: Dwight Howard.

[Odinn]

You should make that clear, to me it's bogus, but I get what you're saying.

Also if that's the way you're doing it, Shaq needs to have 3 1/2...
Actually, kinda like that for me also.

Jordan - 6
Duncan - 4
Shaq - 3,5
Magic - 3
Kareem - 3
Kobe - 3 (in 2000 he was just a regular 2nd option, not that much special)
Hakeem - 2
Wilt - 2

[G.O.A.T]

Also, that's not the exact inverse of 1980. Kareem was the best Laker in the playoffs in general and in the NBA Finals.
Magic was the best Laker in the playoffs in general. But in the NBA Finals Kareem was the best Laker, arguably.

Magic has just as strong a case over Kareem in 1980 as Kareem has over Magic in 1985.

1980
Kareem 33-13-3-5 (played in 5 of 6 games)
Magic 22-9-11-3 (played in all six games led Lakers in MPG)

1985
Kareem 26-9-5-1
Magic 18-7-14-2 (led Lakers in MPG)

In both seasons either player makes a fine choice.


Actually, kinda like that for me also.

Jordan - 6
Duncan - 4
Shaq - 3,5
Magic - 3
Kareem - 3
Kobe - 3 (in 2000 he was just a regular 2nd option, not that much special)
Hakeem - 2
Wilt - 2

How did Kobe jump to three without Shaq dropping to 2.5?

Combined they've only won titles in six seasons and you have them winning in seven... (Kobe 3 + Shaq 3.5 + Wade .5)

[Odinn]

How did Kobe jump to three without Shaq dropping to 2.5?

Combined they've only won titles in six seasons and you have them winning in seven... (Kobe 3 + Shaq 3.5 + Wade .5)
In 1982 NBA Playoffs Kareem was 35.
In 2006 NBA Playoffs Shaq was 34.

If we count 1982 as 0.5, so we can count 2006 also.

-----

In 2001 NBA Playoffs, Shaq was the best Laker but Kobe performed as well as in the 09-10 Playoffs. He could be #1 player any other team that hasn't Shaq or Duncan.

And 2002 playoffs performance was very good also.

Unquestionably, Shaq was the best Laker but what Kobe did in 2001 and 2002 was exceptional.

That's why I gave +1 to Kobe but didn't drop Shaq to 3-.

-----

I split 82-85 titles as 1-1, because of Kareem's age mostly. If Kareem would perform like that in his prime with Prime Magic, there would not be "who had more impact" or "who was the greater" questions.

[G.O.A.T]

In 1982 NBA Playoffs Kareem was 35.
In 2006 NBA Playoffs Shaq was 34.

If we count 1982 as 0.5, so we can count 2006 also.

-----

In 2001 NBA Playoffs, Shaq was the best Laker but Kobe performed as well as in the 09-10 Playoffs. He could be #1 player any other team that hasn't Shaq or Duncan.

And 2002 playoffs performance was very good also.

Unquestionably, Shaq was the best Laker but what Kobe did in 2001 and 2002 was exceptional.

That's why I gave +1 to Kobe but didn't drop Shaq to 3-.

-----

I split 82-85 titles as 1-1, because of Kareem's age mostly. If Kareem would perform like that in his prime with Prime Magic, there would not be "who had more impact" or "who was the greater" questions.

you're not understanding. Even if Kobe was exceptional, it wasn't a title as best player. You can't give away 1.5 titles as best player for a single season.

[Odinn]

you're not understanding. Even if Kobe was exceptional, it wasn't a title as best player. You can't give away 1.5 titles as best player for a single season.
Then it comes to my first post about this;

Duncan - 4 times
Kareem - 3 times
Bird - 3 times
Magic - 3 times
Shaq - 3 times
Kobe - 2 times
Hakeem - 2 times
Wilt - 2 times

Only think we can argue about, Kareem-Magic. Kareem definitely has '71 and '80. Magic definitely has '87 and '88. IMO, we can argue about 1982 and 1985 titles coz of Kareem's age and performance.

[jlauber]

Kareem's CAREER stands on it's own. You can read all of the accolades throughout this thread. IMHO, he has a CASE for G.O.A.T.

And I also agree with Pointguard, as well. I honestly believe that a motivated Kareem COULD have been even better. Everyone here knows my take on Chamberlain, but even I would have to admit that Kareem was the best player in the league from '71 on throughout the 70's. And, much of his team's lack of success was beyond his control, too. Who could hold that Blazer series against him?

MJ and Russell probably have the strongest cases for G.O.A.T., but IMHO, Kareem, Magic, and Wilt are right there. And a PRIME Shaq has a case, as well.

[winwin]

Odinn thank you

jlauber i agree Kareem Chamberlain MJ and Russell have cases for G.O.A.T

G.O.A.T you meann kareem has no case for the greatest?

[G.O.A.T]

^Objectively of course he does.

In my eyes...no.

I've never considered him and never will. He simply left way too much on the table.

[jlauber]

^Objectively of course he does.

In my eyes...no.

I've never considered him and never will. He simply left way too much on the table.

Kareem has actually gained in these discussions in the last couple of seasons, but I happen to agree with at least some of your take. Those that were actually around in the 70's would attest to the fact that, while he was certainly the best player in the game in that decade, he was never really considered a G.O.A.T. candidate at that time. And, as you mentioned, I think he went "thru the motions" in the last half of that decade. In fact, the movie "Airplane" brings those assertions to light.

However, after Magic arrived, Kareem stepped up his level of play, which offset his declining physical skills, and there was no question that he was a major factor in the bulk of those five Laker titles. His '85 Finals may very well have been his finest series, too. After a lethargic game one, in which the mdeia basically wrote him off as over-the-hill, he DOMINATED the rest of that series. His last five games of that series were as great as anyone's.

IMHO, there are five players who have legitimate cases for G.O.A.T. Some question my take on Magic, but IMHO, aside from Russell, he was the game's greatest "winner." Never a losing season. His team's averaged nearly 60 wins per season in his 12 full seasons. He went to NINE Finals in his 12 seasons. And he came within a couple of injuries, and even PLAYS, of winning a few more titles.

The other's include Russell...who, with 11 rings in 13 seasons (and he was injured in one of those losses)...well, what more needs to be said. And, it is EASY to claim that Russell played with LOADED teams. Yes, most of them were. BUT, he WON with LOADED teams. There have been many examples of superior teams LOSING in the post-season. AND, Russell won a title in his LAST season, with a 48-34 team, and without HCA in ANY of those three series. Finally, one only needs to look at the Celtics, PRE-RUSSELL, and then Boston, POST-RUSSELL, to see his TRUE impact.

Of course, Chamberlain OWNS the NBA RECORD BOOK. In fact, not even the Great Gretzky can come close to the records that Wilt owns in his sport. But, Chamberlain's career accomplishments go beyond the Record Book. He won two rings, of course, but he narrowly missed on FIVE other occasions. With a few more points, or plays, and he would have had as many as SEVEN rings. And he was seldom outplayed in single games, much less entire post-season series, either.

Then, there was Kareem. Clearly, he COULD have been even MORE dominant. When he was motivated, he could effortlessly pour in 40+ point games on Wilt, Cowens, Walton, Hayes...you name them, he did it (ok, not Thurmond.)
But, much like Chamberlain in the bulk of his career, the EXPECTATIONS almost became unobtainable. Kareem was even blamed for losses in the Blazer sweep in '77...in a series in which he was unstoppable. I think all of that weight just broke him down. And much like Wilt...he could see that 30-17 .575 seasons did not necessarily result in titles. Here he was, almost single-handedly carrying teams, and painfully watching his team's lose. At some point, I think he subconsciously gave up.

I won't bother going into MJ's case. Most here annoint him as the clear-cut GOAT. And, he certainly has a strong case. I have also covered some of his "short-comings", and I won't go into detail now. IMHO, though, he benefitted from quality rosters in a watered-down NBA. Still, no other player has risen to his offensive levels in the post-season.

So, that is MY Top-5 candidates for G.O.A.T. (and once again, a PEAK Shaq was right there with any of them.) And some might even throw Bird or Duncan into these discussions. I don't quite have those two at the levels ofb the others, but there are many who do.

[Odinn]

So, that is MY Top-5 candidates for G.O.A.T. (and once again, a PEAK Shaq was right there with any of them.) And some might even throw Bird or Duncan into these discussions. I don't quite have those two at the levels ofb the others, but there are many who do.
Peak wise, IMO, Shaq top 4 ever along side Jordan, Wilt and Kareem. We can argue about who is the #1 stat-wise or impact-wise. But these 4 players' peaks are top 4 ever for me and that's clear-cut.

[jlauber]

Peak wise, IMO, Shaq top 4 ever along side Jordan, Wilt and Kareem. We can argue about who is the #1 stat-wise or impact-wise. But these 4 players' peaks are top 4 ever for me and that's clear-cut.

I think you have to also account for Russell's defensive impact, as well. Some of those Celtic teams were among the WORST shooting teams in the league. For instance, his 62-63 team shot .427...which was dead last. Yet, they ran away with the best record and subsequently won the title.

ThaRegul8r posted a great example in one of those post-seasons. The Royals, with Oscar, Lucas, and talented shooters, and who averaged 114 ppg over the course of the regular season, averaged 93 ppg in a five game playoff. And, in the vast majority of the Chamberlain H2H's, Wilt's teammates rarily played anywhere near their regular season levels against the Celtics in the post-season.

I also believe that Magic's overall impact went beyond his own personal numbers, as well. IMHO, players like Russell, Duncan, and Magic elevated their teammates to a sum greater than the whole.

[Odinn]

I think you have to also account for Russell's defensive impact, as well. Some of those Celtic teams were among the WORST shooting teams in the league. For instance, his 62-63 team shot .427...which was dead last. Yet, they ran away with the best record and subsequently won the title.

ThaRegul8r posted a great example in one of those post-seasons. The Royals, with Oscar, Lucas, and talented shooters, and who averaged 114 ppg over the course of the regular season, averaged 93 ppg in a five game playoff. And, in the vast majority of the Chamberlain H2H's, Wilt's teammates rarily played anywhere near their regular season levels against the Celtics in the post-season.

I also believe that Magic's overall impact went beyond his own personal numbers, as well. IMHO, players like Russell, Duncan, and Magic elevated their teammates to a sum greater than the whole.
Especially I agree with the bolded part. But what about Bird? You didn't mention him on purpose?

[ThaSwagg3r]

Kareem did something that many all-time greats didn't do and that was be the best player on a team that didn't even make the playoffs.

See '74-'75 Bucks and '75-'76 Lakers.

[ThaRegul8r]

^Objectively of course he does.

In my eyes...no.

I've never considered him and never will. He simply left way too much on the table.

Kareem has actually gained in these discussions in the last couple of seasons, but I happen to agree with at least some of your take. Those that were actually around in the 70's would attest to the fact that, while he was certainly the best player in the game in that decade, he was never really considered a G.O.A.T. candidate at that time. And, as you mentioned, I think he went "thru the motions" in the last half of that decade. In fact, the movie "Airplane" brings those assertions to light.

IMO, Kareem is irrefutably ONE OF the G.O.A.T., but is not THEE G.O.A.T. I see the argument people try to make, I've lain it out and looked at it, but ultimately I disagree with it. And unlike these other people, I have Kareem's entire 20-year career laid out and broken down year-by-year. I know none of these "what about Kareem" people have done so, so their opinion doesn't quite carry enough weight for me, seeing how they haven't extensively researched the matter to have a credible opinion.


However, after Magic arrived, Kareem stepped up his level of play, which offset his declining physical skills, and there was no question that he was a major factor in the bulk of those five Laker titles.

In Magic's very first year, going into the NBA Finals against Philadelphia

[jlauber]

Especially I agree with the bolded part. But what about Bird? You didn't mention him on purpose?

I am in the minority on this one. I just don't see Bird's post-season play as being as dominant as the other's. Once again, though, there was a short window in the 80's when many were ranking Bird as the G.O.A.T.

Same with Hakeem's overall career. I understand that Hakeem was a one-of-a-kind player. And I also agree that he was saddled with several poor rosters. But, I just can't see him having a case to crack the top-5 (or my Top-7 of Russell, MJ, Magic, Wilt, Kareem, Shaq, and Duncan.) I don't even consider his PEAK as great as the other's (but there are obviously quite a few here who will argue that point.)

Still, I have Bird, Kobe, and Hakeem in MY Top-10. That is pretty damn impressive given all of the MANY all-time greats that have played in the NBA. BTW, Mikan has a case for Top-10, as does Pettit. I just didn't see those two play, so I am reluctant to rank them. Especially Mikan, who dominated before the advent of the 24 second clock, and who played in an NBA that was basically almost all white.

Having said all of the above, I am beginning to tire in all of these "rankings" debates. My god, Oscar, Moses, Dr. J, Hondo, West, Robinson, Garnett, Baylor, Dirk, K. Malone, Barkley, Barry, and so many others have had such great careers. I applaud those that attempt to rank a top-50, or top-100, or even beyond that, but at some point it almost becomes futile. There is simply no set criteria which can be rationally applied in these discussions. Some players are blessed with quality rosters, or coaches, or long relatively injury-free careers, while other's toil with poor surrounding talent, or bad coaching, or have their careers cut short by injuries.

Take Garnett for instance. Who knows how is career might have played out had he been blessed with a team like the '08 Celtics for several seasons, instead of that single season? And Rick Barry's career is seldom mentioned when discussing the all-time greats, but his '75 season was truly remarkable. The '74 Warriors, with a very talented roster, were gutted. Most observers thought it was just a cost-cutting measure. In any case, no one expected that '75 Golden St. team to win the title. Here again, had Barry and Thurmond played together for the bulk of their careers, instead of a couple of seasons split by several years apart...who knows how many rings the two would have gotten? And Barry won a ring in the ABA, too. In any case, Barry, with 2-3 rings would probably be knocking on the door of most Top-10's.

I just think that while these discussions are usually fun...there is just too much speculation, and ultimately, it just comes down to opinions (many of them uneducated.) I won't bother arguing with those that place Bird, or even Hakeem over Wilt or Russell. I don't see them as having the overall careers as Chamberlain or Russell, but who knows how their careers would have played out had they played in the 60's...or if Wilt and Russell would have played in the 80's and 90's?

I am more interested in the history of the game...even the modern history. I enjoy those that bring up new relatively unknown articles or stats. Of course, most everyone here has access to the post-MJ era articles. So, there is very little we don't know about the players or games of his era. But, how about the games and players of the 70's, and before? I mentioned it another thread, but I would really be interested in some of Oscar's many triple-double games. How many 40-10-10 games, or better, did he have?

In any case, we need to appreciate the greats...including those of THIS era...Lebron, Wade, Dirk, Kobe, and Howard...all of whom will be retired within a few years...as well as those of previous eras. Instead of constantly ripping players, let's just agree to disagree, and enjoy what these greats have contributed to the game.

[Kiddlovesnets]

Because he aint as comparable to MJ, plain and simple. End of the thread.

[jlauber]

[QUOTE=ThaRegul8r]IMO, Kareem is irrefutably ONE OF the G.O.A.T., but is not THEE G.O.A.T. I see the argument people try to make, I've lain it out and looked at it, but ultimately I disagree with it. And unlike these other people, I have Kareem's entire 20-year career laid out and broken down year-by-year. I know none of these "what about Kareem" people have done so, so their opinion doesn't quite carry enough weight for me, seeing how they haven't extensively researched the matter to have a credible opinion.



In Magic's very first year, going into the NBA Finals against Philadelphia

[PHILA]

Outside of his scoring ability & soft touch, no aspect of KAJ's game (as far as tangible skills) was on par with Russell's. Some may say footwork in reference to KAJ's offensive maneuverability in the pivot (of course neglecting the defensive footwork of Bill), however as poor as Russell's shooting touch was he had outstanding footwork. Below we can see him perform the "wheeling" hook shot move that KAJ made a living off of.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8UtG7-I2wBw#t=23m5s

[PHILA]

Practice with a rebounding ring undoubtedly improved KAJ's touch. :applause:



Values of the Game - Bill Bradley

http://i.imgur.com/edpb7.png
http://i.imgur.com/s1XLa.png

[millwad]

OP is a moron, first he made a thread about Kareem being overrated and now this..

[Big164]

What was Kareem the "greatest" at?

Wilt has the 70+ scoring records
Russell has 11 rings
Mike has the best combo of rings/records

I can't see where Kareem fits in? He's not the best at any particular thing and as a jack of all trades he'll always come second to Jordan.

[Odinn]

What was Kareem the "greatest" at?

Wilt has the 70+ scoring records
Russell has 11 rings
Mike has the best combo of rings/records

I can't see where Kareem fits in? He's not the best at any particular thing and as a jack of all trades he'll always come second to Jordan.
Kareem has 6 MVPs. Record.
Kareem scored 38387 points. Record.
Kareem has 19 All-Star selection. Record.
Kareem scored 5762 points in the playoffs. 2nd.

Kareem definetely had the best longevity.

[PTB Fan]

What was Kareem the "greatest" at?

Wilt has the 70+ scoring records
Russell has 11 rings
Mike has the best combo of rings/records

I can't see where Kareem fits in? He's not the best at any particular thing and as a jack of all trades he'll always come second to Jordan.

Kareem's resume and accomplishments are second to none...longetivity as well (sorry for the bad spelling).

[The Iron Fist]

What was Kareem the "greatest" at?

Wilt has the 70+ scoring records
Russell has 11 rings
Mike has the best combo of rings/records

I can't see where Kareem fits in? He's not the best at any particular thing and as a jack of all trades he'll always come second to Jordan.

He was the greatest at winning and being dominant at every level.

3 straight NYC titles at Power Memorial
3 straight NCAA titles at UCLA 3 time Most Outstanding Player
6 NBA titles with Bucks and Lakers 6 time MVP

[Pointguard]

He had an inspiration problem before Magic?

Before Magic
9 time all star
5 time MVP
Finals MVP
9 time all NBA
8 time all defensive
5 time most field goals made
2 time most total rebounds
3 times most blocks
3 time most points
2 time most points per game
4 time most blocks per game
8 time highest PER * for the geeks who love this stat

You're going to have to actually do some research if you truly believe that Kareem had a problem with inspiration.

Its odd that you mention Kareem needed Magic, when its Magic who never won without Kareem in the NBA.
Nooo, you need to do your research, or simply gain more understanding.

First you need to understand that accomplishments and inspiration are not parallel as you suggest. The game came easy for Kareem. He was easily the best player during his time. But I was way more impressed by the inspired play of Rick Barry, Walt Frazier, Willis Reed, Wes Unseld and Dave Cowens and who won more impressively than Kareem did. The 70's was the only decade when anybody could win it all - a truly weak era. There were no dominant teams and Kareem was proof that there was no franchise player (please prove me wrong). Then the 80's come and now you got super teams and Magically, Kareem can all of a sudden be like a franchise player in the toughest era in the sport after his ppg are down ten and his rebounds are down by 6 per game.

He's now pumping his fist, he now knows when to exert his energy, he now knows how to be important at crucial times. A guy whose career lacked a winning punch in a weak era, now has a winning swag in a great era, after he has obviously lost a step?

Once again, had you seen Kareem play before Magic you could see he had great ability but never put his foot hard on the pedal and would drift into long periods when he didn't play with a sense of purpose. ohhh, and what Magic did the year after Kareem was gone, was more impressive than Kareem's 9 or 10 years before Magic simply because of the number of franchise players contending when Magic made it to the finals again. No way does Magic come out of the 70's with only one ring.

[Big164]

Kareem has 6 MVPs. Record.
Kareem scored 38387 points. Record.
Kareem has 19 All-Star selection. Record.
Kareem scored 5762 points in the playoffs. 2nd.

Kareem definetely had the best longevity.
You do realize mj and wilt have pages of world records right? Kareem is nOt even close, no one is. Kareems reads more like John stocktons list of records than the goat.

Stockton dished out 15806 assists record
Stockton grabbed 3265 steals record
Stockon has 1839 assists in the playoffs...2nd

Stockton definitely had longevity because he played the most games in NBA history with a single team blah blah blah

Stockton and Kareem became participation jocks because they had no chance of matching peak-magic or peak-wilt respectively. I always laugh when I see Kareem in his 15th season celebrate a record wilt accomplished in 13 seasons.

Stat-wise wilt blows Kareem out of the water in scoring rebounding.

Russell blows Kareem away in championship rings

Mj was the alpha dog in all 6 of his titles while Kareem was sidekick/role player for 2, and did not play in the final game of another.

Kareem is more of a participation jock like Stockton and parish, not a goat like Russell mj and wilt.

Kareem is the p

[D-Wade316]

You do realize mj and wilt have pages of world records right? Kareem is nOt even close, no one is. Kareems reads more like John stocktons list of records than the goat.

Stockton dished out 15806 assists record
Stockton grabbed 3265 steals record
Stockon has 1839 assists in the playoffs...2nd

Stockton definitely had longevity because he played the most games in NBA history with a single team blah blah blah

Stockton and Kareem became participation jocks because they had no chance of matching peak-magic or peak-wilt respectively. I always laugh when I see Kareem in his 15th season celebrate a record wilt accomplished in 13 seasons.

Stat-wise wilt blows Kareem out of the water in scoring rebounding.

Russell blows Kareem away in championship rings

Mj was the alpha dog in all 6 of his titles while Kareem was sidekick/role player for 2, and did not play in the final game of another.

Kareem is more of a participation jock like Stockton and parish, not a goat like Russell mj and wilt.

Kareem is the p
As much as I think Kareem is slightly overrated, you're going way too far. First, he was the best player of the '70s. Second, his accomplishments are second to none. Third, of all the his longevity in the game shows just how dedicated he was to the game.

But again, he wasn't as dominant as many people think. Compare Wilt's competition to his. Wilt put the greatest dynasty of all-time on the ropes many times. Kareem? 8 years of disappointment before Magic, and that was on perhaps the weakest era in terms of competition. Stat wise, Kareem has simply no case over Wilt. In terms of domination, Kareem again has no case over Wilt.

How about Russell? Russell is simply the greatest winner and the most accomplished player of all-time. In terms of domination, both are equally the same. Kareem was primarily an offensive player. Russell was a defensive player. Both dominated the era in which they played, but I'll take Russell over him simply because of Russell's will to win.

With all that said, we must take a look at both sides carefully. He is absolutely top-5 of all-time. He is one of the most accomplished players in basketball history. However, the 8 years of disappointment is what really taints his career. He should have dominated that era.

[millwad]

What was Kareem the "greatest" at?

Wilt has the 70+ scoring records
Russell has 11 rings
Mike has the best combo of rings/records

I can't see where Kareem fits in? He's not the best at any particular thing and as a jack of all trades he'll always come second to Jordan.

Wilt has 70+ scoring records while Kareem is the all-time scoring leader. Kareem won 6 MVP's, Wilt won 4. Kareem won 6 championships while Wilt only won 2 while not being the leading scorer of those championshipteams.