Top 10 Centers In NBA History as of 2011, Fox Sports

[Legends66NBA7]

http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/lists/Top-10-centers-in-NBA-history#photo-title=Centers%20of%20attention&photo=30115811

Reasons for the choices are in the link.

1. Bill Russell
2. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
3. Wilt Chamberlain
4. Shaquille O'Neal
5. Hakeem Olajuwon
6. Moses Malone
7. George Mikan
8. David Robinson
9. Willis Reed
10. Nate Thurmond

[andgar923]

*whew... *I was worried they were gonna have Howard in there.

I still don't think Bill should be no.1

[catch24]

*whew... *I was worried they were gonna have Howard in there.

I still don't think Bill should be no.1

Why not?

[Legends66NBA7]

*whew... *I was worried they were gonna have Howard in there.

I still don't think Bill should be no.1

Agreed. I don't think Thurmond should be over Patrick Ewing, though.

The debate for who should be #1 center of all-time seems to always be the toughest one.

[DaPerceive]

Ewing should be on there but then again I know nothing about Reed or Thurmond, in particular Thurmond so maybe they should be ahead of Ewing.

[Legends66NBA7]

Why not?

I think they were going for all-time wise.

Although, Howard does have 3 DPOY's under his belt, I don't think that's enough to vault him in the Top 10 yet.

[andgar923]

Why not?

I understand that rings matter, but take away his rings and he isn't as great as some of the other centers. Yes, he's still good and I"m sure somebody can dig up some great games, but I don't see him above Kareem, Wilt, Shaq, Hakeem, David without his rings.

If we base it solely on rings then it's fair.

But Kareem has rings.
Shaq has rings.
Hakeem has rings.
David has rings.

I honestly think that Kareem should be GOAT cause he has the best combination of skill, rings, and accolades.

Wilt has the stats and accolades
Shaq is a combination of Wilt and Kareem

[Sarcastic]

Pat Ewing is better than Reed, and just about every Knick fans knows that.

[Lebron23]

Correct Lists

1. Kareem Abdul Jabbar
2. Wilt Chamberlain
3. Shaquille O'Neal
4. Hakeem Olajuwon
5. Moses Malone
6. Bill Russell
7. George Mikan
8. David Robinson
9. Patrick Ewing
10. Willis Reed

[D.J.]

My top 10:



Wilt
Kareem
Russell
Olajuwon
Shaq
Moses
Thurmond
Mikan
Robinson
Ewing

[catch24]

I understand that rings matter, but take away his rings and he isn't as great as some of the other centers.

Yeah, but if you take away Kareem, Shaq and Hakeem's rings...they're not ranked where they are currently either. Fact is, Russell was the focal-point of those Celtics Championships.

If blocks were a counted stat then? He'd be known as the greatest defender ever (him or Wilt... or both).


If we base it solely on rings then it's fair.

His place in history isn't solely due to the amount of championships he has though. Russell is one of the greatest rebounders, defenders, leaders and coaches the game has seen. We're not talking about Robert Horry here.

[andgar923]

Yeah, but if you take away Kareem, Shaq and Hakeem's rings...they're not ranked where they are currently either. Fact is, Russell was the focal-point of those Celtics Championships.

If blocks were a counted stat then? He'd be known as the greatest defender ever (him or Wilt... or both).



His place in history isn't solely due to the amount of championships he has though. Russell is one of the greatest rebounders, defenders, leaders and coaches the game has seen. We're not talking about Robert Horry here.

If you take away all of their rings Kareem, Shaq, Wilt, Hakeem and DRob will be better.... that was my main point.

And of course I understand that Bill was no Horry, I agreed that he was a great player, just not as good as some of the other top centers, which is only a handful all time.

[catch24]

If you take away all of their rings Kareem, Shaq, Wilt, Hakeem and DRob will be better.... that was my main point.

That's not how rankings work though. You can't take away these players accomplishments to fit what you think works. Had MJ never won a championship? Is he even a top 3 player?

[Legends66NBA7]

If you take away all of their rings Kareem, Shaq, Wilt, Hakeem and DRob will be better.... that was my main point.

And of course I understand that Bill was no Horry, I agreed that he was a great player, just not as good as some of the other top centers, which is only a handful all time.

Back in Russell's era, the players used to vote for the MVP. They voted for Russell MVP 5 times.

They even voted him MVP in 1961-62 over these players that year:

Wilt Chamberlain: 50.4ppg 25.7rpg 2.4apg 50.6%fg 61.3%ft

Oscar Robertson: 30.8ppg 12.5rpg 11.4apg 47.8%fg  80.3%ft

Elgin Baylor: 38.3ppg 18.6rpg 4.6apg 42.8%fg 75.4%ft

Jerry West: 30.8ppg 7.9rpg 5.4apg 44.5%fg 76.9%ft

Bob Pettit: 31.1ppg 18.7rpg 3.7apg 45.0%fg 77.1%ft

Richie Guerin: 29.5ppg 6.4rpg 6.9apg 44.2%fg 82.0%ft


I think winning and impact go beyond the stats. Russell's defensive impact was so valuable to those Celtics teams because some of his teammates were poor defenders. He was that good of an anchor for the defense, that his role was played to a perfection.

Perfect example for a player who needed Russell is Bob Cousy. He was a bad defender and never started winning until Russell came along.

[Big#50]

KAJ
DUNCAN
Shaq
Hakeem
DROB
Malone
Ewing
WILT
Russell
?

[D.J.]

KAJ
DUNCAN
Shaq
Hakeem
DROB
Malone
Ewing
WILT
Russell
?


Power forward.

[Big#50]

Power forward.
He's a big man. The best since Jabbar the GOAT.

[D.J.]

He's a big man. The best since Jabbar the GOAT.


He's still primarily a power forward.

[Big#50]

He's still primarily a power forward.
Not to me. He is a big.

[Sarcastic]

He's a big man. The best since Jabbar the GOAT.

Shaq.

[andgar923]

That's not how rankings work though. You can't take away these players accomplishments to fit what you think works. Had MJ never won a championship? Is he even a top 3 player?

But like I mentioned....

I took into account the other player's rings and other accolades as well. And I think it's fair to say that when everything's considered the other centers surpass him.

And no, MJ wouldn't be considered teh GOAT if he didn't have a ring. But I can guarantee that if he only had 2 rings the majority would still rank him no lower than top 3.

A good way to rank them would be by assigning a point system (1-10) based on different factors i.e.:

Rings
Defense
Impact
Offense
Stats/accolades

Then we'd accumulate the points and the player with the most wins.

Here are two examples... Bill vs Kareem:

Rings: Bill 10 Kareem 9
Defense: Bill 10 Kareem 10
Offense: Bill 6 Kareem 10
Impact: Bill 7 Kareem 7
Stats/accolades: Bill 9 Kareem 10

Now... I'm sure the impact can be argued cause it can be hard to gauge, so they stayed the same. The ratings should also be compared to Hall of Fame level of play. By that I mean, if we were to rate Bill's offense compared to Hall of Fame players, he'd be about average (give or take 1 pt). Of course, Kareem is the all time leading scorer and arguably one of the top 3 best scorers of all time, with an array of weapons most notably the skyhook. Do we honestly wanna rate Bill's offense as high as Kareem's, Wilt's, Shaq's, D Rob's, Hakeem's, etc.etc?

I think that's a fair way to judge/rate/rank players in this level... no?

[Sarcastic]

http://static.foxsports.com/content/fscom/img/2011/08/29/10_20110829163551681_600_400.JPG

Nate was jacked.

[D.J.]

Not to me. He is a big.


Dirk is a big too, but he's still a PF. David Robinson, Rasho Nesterovic, and Nazr Mohammed were centers.

[Deuce Bigalow]

KAJ
DUNCAN
Shaq
Hakeem
DROB
Malone
Ewing
WILT
Russell
?

:facepalm

dont overrate tim dunkedon

[DaPerceive]

My top 10...

1. Russell
2. Kareem
3. Wilt
4. Shaq
5. Hakeem
6. Moses
7. Mikan
8. Robinson
9. Ewing
10. Reed

Note:

-I kind of just threw Mikan out there.
-Wilt was greater than both Shaq and Hakeem but I would rather have Shaq and Hakeem on my team.

[Deuce Bigalow]

He's a big man. The best since Jabbar the GOAT.

no hes not
Kareem, Russell, Wilt, Shaq > Duncan

[Sarcastic]

Dirk is a big too, but he's still a PF. David Robinson, Rasho Nesterovic, and Nazr Mohammed were centers.

:lol Dirk is arguably a shooting guard.

[DaPerceive]

*whew... *I was worried they were gonna have Howard in there.

I still don't think Bill should be no.1
Where do you have Bill then? IMO, he cannot be any lower than 3. I use to have Kareem above him but after doing some more research on the two I realize that Russell was the greater of the two. It is funny, because I use to use a similar argument that you are currently using.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Shaq.

:applause:

Shaq was easily better than Duncan

[catch24]

Now... I'm sure the impact can be argued cause it can be hard to gauge

That could by all means be one way to see it, but Russell's intangibles are more important to me than you. We clearly value the same aspects of the game...just some more than others.


I think that's a fair way to judge/rate/rank players in this level... no?

Somewhat. Not like there's anything wrong with ranking Kareem over Russell. I think you're selling Russell short because of his offensive numbers, though.

We'll just have to agree to disagree.

[DaPerceive]

:applause:

Shaq was easily better than Duncan
Prime/peak, I would agree. I would say Duncan's career was better than Shaq's though. I personally have Duncan ranked ahead of Shaq in my all-time. That being said I don't know why we are talking about Duncan because he is a Power Forward, not a Center.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Prime/peak, I would agree. I would say Duncan's career was better than Shaq's though. I personally have Duncan ranked ahead of Shaq in my all-time. That being said I don't know why we are talking about Duncan because he is a Power Forward, not a Center.

Shaq had the longest streak of 20/10 seasons alltime (13 in a row) and 10 25/10 seasons (Duncan only has 1)
and is 4th alltime in playoff points and 5 alltime in regular season points
Shaq's career > Duncan's

[Legends66NBA7]

That could by all means be one way to see it, but Russell's intangibles are just more important to me than you. We just value different aspects of the game more than others.



Somewhat. Not like there's anything wrong with ranking Kareem over Russell. I think you're selling Russell short because of his offensive numbers, though.

We'll just have to agree to disagree.

I think a lot of people do that and rank Russell lower for that reason.

I mean, he was in a system that made everyone play to their strenghts because he was taking care of their weaknesses (which was defense). Not trying to say that he could be a highly potent scorer like Kareem or Wilt could, but he is playing is role on the team. A team that would become a dynasty because of Russell.

And again, when it mattered most, Russell in his peak years, showed he could get it done on offense (though not all that great, but certianly dispells that notion):

59-60 18.5ppg 25.8rpg 2.9apg 45.6%fg 70.7%ft

60-61 19.1ppg 29.9rpg 4.8apg 42.7%fg 52.3%ft

61-62 22.4ppg 26.4rpg 5.0apg 45.8%fg 72.6%ft

62-63 20.3ppg 25.1rpg 5.1apg 45.3%fg 66.1%ft

64-65 16.5ppg 25.2rpg 6.3apg 52.7%fg 52.6%ft

65-66 19.1ppg 25.2rpg 5.0apg 47.5%fg 61.8%ft

Not to mention, his passing game is certianly one of the best (if not the best) in big man history.

Although, you're right catch, people will have to agree to disagree. But center position for most is a 3 horse race, with Russell, Kareem, and Wilt.

[Big#50]

no hes not
Kareem, Russell, Wilt, Shaq > Duncan
Cool. KAJ and Russell both have said Tim is the best big they have seen.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Cool. KAJ and Russell both have said Tim is the best big they have seen.

not even the best big in his generation

[Deuce Bigalow]

Heres the top 10 players of alltime according to Foxsports

10. Tim Duncan
9. Shaquille O'Neal
8. Kobe Bryant
7. Oscar Robertson
6. Wilt Chamberlain
5. Larry Bird
4. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
3. Bill Russell
2. Magic Johnson
1. Michael Jordan

http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/lists/Top-10-players-in-NBA-history#photo-title=Best%20of%20the%20best&photo=30219323

[catch24]

I think a lot of people do that and rank Russell lower for that reason.

I mean, he was in a system that made everyone play to their strenghts because he was taking care of their weaknesses (which was defense). Not trying to say that he could be a highly potent scorer like Kareem or Wilt could, but he is playing is role on the team. A team that would become a dynasty because of Russell.

And again, when it mattered most, Russell in his peak years, showed he could get it done on offense (though not all that great, but certianly dispells that notion):

59-60 18.5ppg 25.8rpg 2.9apg 45.6%fg 70.7%ft

60-61 19.1ppg 29.9rpg 4.8apg 42.7%fg 52.3%ft

61-62 22.4ppg 26.4rpg 5.0apg 45.8%fg 72.6%ft

62-63 20.3ppg 25.1rpg 5.1apg 45.3%fg 66.1%ft

64-65 16.5ppg 25.2rpg 6.3apg 52.7%fg 52.6%ft

65-66 19.1ppg 25.2rpg 5.0apg 47.5%fg 61.8%ft

Not to mention, his passing game is certianly one of the best (if not the best) in big man history.

Excellent post. Don't wanna quote David Stern (despise the guy), but he said it best: Bill inspired a generation, not just of basketball fans, but Americans everywhere. He is respected by colleagues, coaches, fans, and his legacy clearly has withstood the test of time. "The ultimate champion."

This is exactly why Russell's peers continued to vote him MVP year after year, despite posting inferior numbers to guys like Wilt, West, Robertson, etc. As you eluded to, his impact goes BEYOND a stat sheet. You cannot measure leadership and basketball iq. Bill Russell was the smartest player to ever step on the hardwood, imo.

[with malice]

My top ten (http://with-malice.com/articles/nba/top-10-centers-all-time.html)...
10. Bill Walton
9. Patrick Ewing
8. David Robinson
7. George Mikan
6. Moses Malone
5. Hakeem Olajuwon
4. Shaquille O'Neal
3. Bill Russell
2. Wilt Chamberlain
1. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar

[Yung D-Will]

The way the draft have been looking these top 10 centers will probally stay like this for like the next 3 decades

[DaPerceive]

The way the draft have been looking these top 10 centers will probally stay like this for like the next 3 decades
I could see Howard surpass Ewing and maybe even Robinson by the end of his career. I am more than positive that Howard will at least be in the top 10 when his career is over.

[Vienceslav]

There is no excuse for not having KAJ at #1.
Rusell,Wilt,Shaq are interchangeable at 2-4.

[KevinNYC]

Then we'd accumulate the points and the player with the most wins.

Here are two examples... Bill vs Kareem:

Rings: Bill 10 Kareem 9
Defense: Bill 10 Kareem 10
Offense: Bill 6 Kareem 10
Impact: Bill 7 Kareem 7
Stats/accolades: Bill 9 Kareem 10



I think Rings needs to be at least a 10 - 8 decision. Since Russell won 11 in 13 years played and one year he was injured, that's a big gap over Kareem.

I also think that offense should be a 10-7 because while Kareem was amazing point scorer, the Celtics often ran their offense through Russell who was a great passer and opened up the floor. Kareem was the #1 threat on those Lakers teams, but you can't say they ran the offense through him. Some of the plays the Celtics ran or the variations on the plays Russell came up with and took to Auerbach. He also took their fast breaking to another level

I kind of don't understand what you mean by impact. Since you could argue that Bill Russell had the greatest impact on any team on the NBA ever, a dynasty started when he joined the team and that continued even after the core group changed around him and a dynasty that ended when he left. He was a leader that his teammates rallied around. He was so smart about basketball psychology and what things help teams win that Red Auerbach confessed to him his first year that he didn't know how Russell was doing it. Plus he was devoted to the team game.

10-10 on defense? This is like when your movie ratings only go to four stars, but one four-star movie is better than another. That is there are at the very top compared with everything else, but there is still a distinction

How was Jabbar as an off the ball defender? I don't know about his early career. I thinking that might make it a 10-9 in Russell's defense since Russell was known for having insane lateral quickness and the ability to defend both sides of the lane.

Do you know about the legend of the "Coleman Play?" (http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=121727964529607&topic=101&post=279). Last minute of game seven in 1957, Russell goes in for a layup and his momentum takes him out of bounds and the Hawks rebound and outlet it to Jack Coleman at half court who is way ahead of everyone and if he scores, the Hawks take the lead. Russell blocks the shot.


Said Cousy: “It was the most incredible physical act I’ve ever seen on a basketball floor. I had just led him down the floor for a basket, and his momentum had actually carried him off the floor. Then I looked up and Coleman already had an outlet pass at midcourt, and he was a good four or five steps ahead of everybody. He was going to score, and they were going to get the lead back with 40 seconds or so left to play. Russell took off with those loping steps and they must have been six or seven of the longest steps ever seen. He covered the entire 94 feet in no time at all and blocked Coleman’s shot. Coleman was no speed demon, but he was very athletic and could move.” Heihnsohn and Auerbach also said it the best play they had ever seen.

You also have to consider Russell's BB-IQ here and the study work he did on other players. He would practice other guys moves in a mirror and then work how what his countermoves should be to defend against the guy. From the same link above.


Allow Havlicek to describe the sight of Russell caught back on defense with the opposing team attempting to fast break.

“Say it was a 3-on-1,” Havlicek said. “He could take away a whole side of the floor. He would know the tendencies of everyone involved, and depending on whether the man with the ball was right-handed or left-handed he could make him do what he didn’t want to do. He could take a sequence in which there was a 90 percent scoring chance and reduce it to 50 percent. He would essentially say, ‘I’m going to take away one-half of the floor. Go ahead and see if you can score from the other side.'”

....there has never been anyone at his size who combined jumping ability, timing, lateral mobility, quick-jumping capability, speed, intelligence and, perhaps most of all, intensity at his position.

[bagelred]

Where Patrick Ewing be at?

[KevinNYC]

Here's Russell being interviewed about the Coleman play (http://www.achievement.org/autodoc/page/rus0int-1)

[Legends66NBA7]

Here's Russell being interviewed about the Coleman play (http://www.achievement.org/autodoc/page/rus0int-1)

"I wasn't going to let us lose, not standing around anyway. If we were going to lose, we were going to lose fighting. " - Bill Felton Russell

[Niquesports]

My top ten (http://with-malice.com/articles/nba/top-10-centers-all-time.html)...
10. Bill Walton
9. Patrick Ewing
8. David Robinson
7. George Mikan
6. Moses Malone
5. Hakeem Olajuwon
4. Shaquille O'Neal
3. Bill Russell
2. Wilt Chamberlain
1. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar


Basketbal is a team sport. ITs about winning which takes many factors to have to happen.
In the history of the league only one person has been a constant on a team that won 11 titles.
Jordan has 6 he is the closest and most call him the Goat.Russell won by being a leader his teammates many also HOF'ers were inspired by him. Wilts and Shaq's numbers dwarf Russell's but neither could lead or win like Bill. KAJ had the total package but as a team leader he was a introvert and needed another player Magic or Oscar to lead the team.

[Legends66NBA7]

Basketbal is a team sport. ITs about winning which takes many factors to have to happen.
In the history of the league only one person has been a constant on a team that won 11 titles.
Jordan has 6 he is the closest and most call him the Goat.Russell won by being a leader his teammates many also HOF'ers were inspired by him. Wilts and Shaq's numbers dwarf Russell's but neither could lead or win like Bill. KAJ had the total package but as a team leader he was a introvert and needed another player Magic or Oscar to lead the team.

Yeah I referenced this before too, Niquesports, in the thread that Russell's Impact and winning went further than a stat sheet. But I think this post right here puts Russell in proper prespective:


I bet the Hawks were thinking something similar when they traded him for a couple scorers and watched the Celtics win 11 titles.

Bill Russell from age 17 till he retired he won 2 Hs state titles, 2 NCAA titles, the gold Medal, and 11 NBA titles two of them as player/coach. Meaning in 17 years he won 16 various titles and lost exactly 2 elimination games...one of them in a finals series he was injured for. Meaning injured years aside Bill Russell won everything basketball related he competed in for nearly 2 decades with the exception of 1967. And that took Wilt putting up 22 points, 32 rebounds, and 10 asssists for the series. Wilt put up 29/36/13 to knock them out of the playoffs.

It took quite possibly the greatest individual performance in NBA history on a team with 5 all stars to keep Russell from winning every title he was healthy to compete for....in his life.

And while many like to point to his HOF teammates...being real about it...he has HOF teammates who he took there. KC Jones is a HOF pllayer and he played with Russell in college and the NBA. Russell got him about 10-12 titles of some kind. What do your PER and EFF and other random stats say about KC Jones? Hes a career 7 and 3 player who didnt even shoot 40%. Yet hes in the hall of fame as a PLAYER. Not a coach. As a PLAYER. Know the stat that got him there? He averaged 1 Bill russell for like 12 years. That gets you into the hall of fame. HEs one of Russells 7 HOf teammates but of course he unlike Russell isnt discredited in here because the assumption must be that he was great....otherwise you have to remove some of what discredits Bill. For the sake of hating on Bill being a hall of famer makes you impressive. But for Bill himself...we gotta look into the stats....


And im not even saying KC sucked. Hes said to be a good defender in his way. But he did not have a usual HOF career at all. Sam Jones is in the HOf. Not gonna say he isnt a good shooter. Good player. But plenty of other 5-7 time all stars from that era hwo scored just the same arent hall of famers. Willie Naulls scored his ass off. But he didnt do it on a team that won the title every year. Neither did Don Ohl. 5-6 straight all star games. But he wasnt a Celtic. Sam was both good...and Russells teammate. So hes got 10 rings(many of them he was a key player on...not trying to say he didnt earn his rings). Heinson was accomplished...but he didnt do a whole lot Wayne Embry didnt. Ive heard wilt sing his praises. But hes not in the HOf. He didnt win a gang of rings. Heinson did(also a major contributor....)A lot of guys would be HOf guys if they were on the 60s Celtics. Doesnt make them all normal HOF level.

Russell drug some of his teammates kicking and screaming into the history books. Most not to the degree he took KC but still. The Celtics didnt have a title till he got there won 11 with him and fell to 34 wins when he retired. They retooled and improved yes...but nobody said Red couldnt build a team. Besides they only rebuilt by having good picks due to sucking. Drafted 7 time all star and finals MVP Jojo White after the terrible year without Russell and Dave Cowens after the second consecutive missed post season.

Russell even in retirement helped his team win. They were so awful without him they got to draft back to back superstars to rebuild quickly.

I'll leave you with this. SOmething said by a scout trying to get his team to take Bill in the draft. Guy he was talking to said "I saw the boxscore...guy had 6 points". Response? "Yea but did you notice the other team only had 42?"

Defense isnt a number. Heart isnt a number. Throwing up out of sheer intensity/nerves before every big game isnt a number. Bill Russell isnt a number. Bill Russell is a winner. And the man deserves more respect for what he did and what he had to put up with while doing it(Being black in 50s/60s Boston) than to be laughed at by fans of a game he did so much to build.

I can see why people in the 50s wouldnt get his value. They couldnt see the points. Didnt know the value of rebounding, defense, starting the break, and leadership. But we have the luxury of knowing better. We are supposed to at least. We dont have to wonder if what he did would be effective. Guy won damn near everything he was healthy to compete for from childhood to retirment. **** he probably would have been a gold medalist high jumper if he put his mind to it(He was ranked #2 in the country if you didnt know).

He didnt need per, eff, or plus/minus numbers to do it either. He just needed to be himself.

And if you didnt know..."himself" = the ****ing god.

Once again, major props to Kblaze.

[greensborohill]

Patrick Ewing is my 2nd fave player of all time. I fully support the writers reasoning for leaving him out. . . . very sad. . . poor Patrick.

[RRR3]

Patrick Ewing is my 2nd fave player of all time. I fully support the writers reasoning for leaving him out. . . . very sad. . . poor Patrick.
I don't Ewing is top 10 for sure IMO. Still I always wanted to hear someone call him "Patbrick Ewing", for some reason I find that hysterical (way more than "LeBrick" "Kobrick" "Westbrick", etc.) IDK Why

[greensborohill]

I don't Ewing is top 10 for sure IMO. Still I always wanted to hear someone call him "Patbrick Ewing", for some reason I find that hysterical (way more than "LeBrick" "Kobrick" "Westbrick", etc.) IDK Why

So you think he is or isn't?

Also, Patrick took a lot of clutch shots, he just almost always missed. . . but at least he took them.

[RRR3]

So you think he is or isn't?

Also, Patrick took a lot of clutch shots, he just almost always missed. . . but at least he took them.
I think he is.

[rodman91]

Bill Russell is overrated.

[RRR3]

Bill Russell is overrated.
Finally someone says it. Russell is quite possibly the most overrated player in NBA history IMO.

[Niquesports]

Finally someone says it. Russell is quite possibly the most overrated player in NBA history IMO.


You only overrated if you lose. So what he didnt score 40 points so what he didnt show up on ESPN so what his style of play allowed his teammates to shine. No other player in team sports has been the focal player in winning championships than Bill. Red put the team together but Russ made it happen. Does anyone that know the game think if Elgin and West had Russ it would had been the lakers with 11 titles.

[Miller for 3]

Finally someone says it. Russell is quite possibly the most overrated player in NBA history IMO.

you haven't done enough research to know what you are talking about. Russell is probably the most impactful player to ever play basketball. I hope Regul8tor sees this thread and contributes, but if you have done more than just look at Russell on bbref and studied his team splits when he played in and missed games, you would see the enormous impact he had on the Celtics. He won like 24 titles in 19 years of playing basketball. I guess he was really lucky right? :rolleyes:

[Legends66NBA7]

Bill Russell is overrated.


Finally someone says it. Russell is quite possibly the most overrated player in NBA history IMO.

Care to elaborate ?

[DaPerceive]

Even though Ewing was/is overrated; he should still be in the top 10. The truth is that Ewing got more hype/attention than Robinson and Olajuwon did because he played in NY. One could very well argue that Ewing was never actually the best Center in the league.

[Legends66NBA7]

Even though Ewing was/is overrated; he should still be in the top 10. The truth is that Ewing got more hype/attention than Robinson and Olajuwon did because he played in NY. One could very well argue that Ewing was never actually the best Center in the league.

What years were people saying that ?

[rodman91]

Care to elaborate ?

GOAT center?
3rd best player?

15 ppg (44%) in 60's..He wasn't even best player of his time.He was the best player on best team.

One of the greatest..but there are centers better than him in history.

[Niquesports]

Even though Ewing was/is overrated; he should still be in the top 10. The truth is that Ewing got more hype/attention than Robinson and Olajuwon did because he played in NY. One could very well argue that Ewing was never actually the best Center in the league.
If the Knicks ownership realy wanted to build a Championship team around Ewing who knows hoe pat would be ranked. Given Hakeem didn't have A+ talent either . But Pat had 2 ex CBA players Mason and Starks Put Worthy at PF Mark Price at Pg Chris Mullin at Sf and the Knicks win at least 2 titles . I dont blame pat I blame the Knick onwership.

[Legends66NBA7]

GOAT center?
3rd best player?

15 ppg (44%) in 60's..He wasn't even best player of his time.He was the best player on best team.

One of the greatest..but there are centers better than him in history.

Well both, really. But I guess we can talk about center's here.

Who was the best player of his time then ? It certinaly couldn't have been anyone else, since back in Russell's day, the players voted who was MVP. They voted Russell MVP 5 times. Can't say he wasn't the best player of his time and win that many chips.

Also, Russell was picked MVP in 1961-62 over these players that year:

Wilt Chamberlain: 50.4ppg 25.7rpg 2.4apg 50.6%fg 61.3%ft

Oscar Robertson: 30.8ppg 12.5rpg 11.4apg 47.8%fg  80.3%ft

Elgin Baylor: 38.3ppg 18.6rpg 4.6apg 42.8%fg 75.4%ft

Jerry West: 30.8ppg 7.9rpg 5.4apg 44.5%fg 76.9%ft

Bob Pettit: 31.1ppg 18.7rpg 3.7apg 45.0%fg 77.1%ft

Richie Guerin: 29.5ppg 6.4rpg 6.9apg 44.2%fg 82.0%ft

Russel's impact went beyond scoring. He was also in a system that focused more on ball movement and team chemistry. Russell had to be the main anchor for most of his teammates main liabilities as well: Defense. So Russell, not trying to say he would have been an offensive juggernaut, didn't have to score because he had other teammates helping him out on that end, while he covered for them. He did what he did to win the game.

Also, in the playoffs when it mattered most, Russell in his peak could certinaly have good scoring runs:

59-60 18.5ppg 25.8rpg 2.9apg 45.6%fg 70.7%ft

60-61 19.1ppg 29.9rpg 4.8apg 42.7%fg 52.3%ft

61-62 22.4ppg 26.4rpg 5.0apg 45.8%fg 72.6%ft

62-63 20.3ppg 25.1rpg 5.1apg 45.3%fg 66.1%ft

64-65 16.5ppg 25.2rpg 6.3apg 52.7%fg 52.6%ft

65-66 19.1ppg 25.2rpg 5.0apg 47.5%fg 61.8%ft

That dispells any notion that he couldn't be a good offensive player and he certianly stepped it up even more in the Finals. Also, his passing skills are in the full of effect as well.



I feel it's fine to have different center's on top of the list, we all have different views on it. This certianly is the hardest list to rank compared to the other 4, espically coming down to the final 3 players.

Russell is certianly one of the best center's, arguably the best center and GOAT for some. He ain't overrated, is what I am trying to say.

We shall agree to disagree, though.

[Niquesports]

Well both, really. But I guess we can talk about center's here.

Who was the best player of his time then ? It certinaly couldn't have been anyone else, since back in Russell's day, the players voted who was MVP. They voted Russell MVP 5 times. Can't say he wasn't the best player of his time and win that many chips.

Also, Russell was picked MVP in 1961-62 over these players that year:

Wilt Chamberlain: 50.4ppg 25.7rpg 2.4apg 50.6%fg 61.3%ft

Oscar Robertson: 30.8ppg 12.5rpg 11.4apg 47.8%fg  80.3%ft

Elgin Baylor: 38.3ppg 18.6rpg 4.6apg 42.8%fg 75.4%ft

Jerry West: 30.8ppg 7.9rpg 5.4apg 44.5%fg 76.9%ft

Bob Pettit: 31.1ppg 18.7rpg 3.7apg 45.0%fg 77.1%ft

Richie Guerin: 29.5ppg 6.4rpg 6.9apg 44.2%fg 82.0%ft

Russel's impact went beyond scoring. He was also in a system that focused more on ball movement and team chemistry. Russell had to be the main anchor for most of his teammates main liabilities as well: Defense. So Russell, not trying to say he would have been an offensive juggernaut, didn't have to score because he had other teammates helping him out on that end, while he covered for them. He did what he did to win the game.

Also, in the playoffs when it mattered most, Russell in his peak could certinaly have good scoring runs:

59-60 18.5ppg 25.8rpg 2.9apg 45.6%fg 70.7%ft

60-61 19.1ppg 29.9rpg 4.8apg 42.7%fg 52.3%ft

61-62 22.4ppg 26.4rpg 5.0apg 45.8%fg 72.6%ft

62-63 20.3ppg 25.1rpg 5.1apg 45.3%fg 66.1%ft

64-65 16.5ppg 25.2rpg 6.3apg 52.7%fg 52.6%ft

65-66 19.1ppg 25.2rpg 5.0apg 47.5%fg 61.8%ft

That dispells any notion that he couldn't be a good offensive player and he certianly stepped it up even more in the Finals. Also, his passing skills are in the full of effect as well.



I feel it's fine to have different center's on top of the list, we all have different views on it. This certianly is the hardest list to rank compared to the other 4, espically coming down to the final 3 players.

Russell is certianly one of the best center's, arguably the best center and GOAT for some. He ain't overrated, is what I am trying to say.

We shall agree to disagree, though.


Since it seems like this is a mens debate lets look at it as if it was women.

Sure you have that pretty woman
you might get that woman with the nice body
or that woman that has the freaky sex
and oh yea that woman that loves going to the bar and can drink drink drink drink how much fun.
But most men when we mature
want that woman with the steady job
keeps us in check when we do what we men do foolish things
that woman that lets us be the man all the while she is taking care of bussiness
That woman who lets us shine while she takes care of the kids cooks the dinner keeps the house clean.
For anyone over 40 this is why we understand Russell's role and what makes him so great. If your under 20 and watch ESPN you just wont understand the impact Russell had and why he is the GOAT.

[Legends66NBA7]

Since it seems like this is a mens debate lets look at it as if it was women.

Sure you have that pretty woman
you might get that woman with the nice body
or that woman that has the freaky sex
and oh yea that woman that loves going to the bar and can drink drink drink drink how much fun.
But most men when we mature
want that woman with the steady job
keeps us in check when we do what we men do foolish things
that woman that lets us be the man all the while she is taking care of bussiness
That woman who lets us shine while she takes care of the kids cooks the dinner keeps the house clean.
For anyone over 40 this is why we understand Russell's role and what makes him so great. If your under 20 and watch ESPN you just wont understand the impact Russell had and why he is the GOAT.

hahaha... Interesting analogy. That's why I say that stats alone don't tell the whole story:

-Context: Watching the games, when and what play happened when ? What was momentum swinger ? Who made the key plays down the strech ? etc..

-Impact: Sticking with Russell, his impact on BOTH ends, just can't be put on a stat sheet. As catch24 mentioned earlier, leadership can't be put down as a number, intangibles can't be put down as a number, number of screens, hustle plays, deflections, intimidation factor, etc... can't be put down as a number. Russell literally willed his teammates to win and took some of those players into the HOF with him.

-Originality: Nobody has even come close to the legacy of Russell's defense. If the All-Defense, DPOY, and Finals MVP were all around during Russell's time, then he would have been on the First Team Defense a lot and something like 8-9 Finals MVP's and DPOY's. The Finals MVP is even named after him, go figure.

-Winning: Nobody did it better. Russell is a winner, period.

[Math2]

http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/lists/Top-10-centers-in-NBA-history#photo-title=Centers%20of%20attention&photo=30115811

Reasons for the choices are in the link.

1. Bill Russell
2. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
3. Wilt Chamberlain
4. Shaquille O'Neal
5. Hakeem Olajuwon
6. Moses Malone
7. George Mikan
8. David Robinson
9. Willis Reed
10. Nate Thurmond

Actually a very good list...much better than the other stuff they've been posting...I'd rate it the same.

[Niquesports]

Actually a very good list...much better than the other stuff they've been posting...I'd rate it the same.

Id have to put Dave Cowens in over Thurmond

[with malice]

Basketbal is a team sport. ITs about winning which takes many factors to have to happen.
In the history of the league only one person has been a constant on a team that won 11 titles.
Jordan has 6 he is the closest and most call him the Goat.Russell won by being a leader his teammates many also HOF'ers were inspired by him. Wilts and Shaq's numbers dwarf Russell's but neither could lead or win like Bill. KAJ had the total package but as a team leader he was a introvert and needed another player Magic or Oscar to lead the team.
I agree with this. However, when I wrote my list (as part of a Hoops Manifesto (http://www.hoopsmanifesto.com) grouping) we were looking at basketball, not just NBA. Kareem's overall a better selection.
If you're going to list championships as a major component of listing someone, then you have to also consider the environment in which they played.
There's absolutely no comparing the league in Russell's day to what Jordan contended with.

To state the Russell has 11 championships, therefore he's the best is rather simplistic.

[Math2]

I agree with this. However, when I wrote my list (as part of a Hoops Manifesto (http://www.hoopsmanifesto.com) grouping) we were looking at basketball, not just NBA. Kareem's overall a better selection.
If you're going to list championships as a major component of listing someone, then you have to also consider the environment in which they played.
There's absolutely no comparing the league in Russell's day to what Jordan contended with.

To state the Russell has 11 championships, therefore he's the best is rather simplistic.

Russell's league is FAR superior to Jordan's...

[Math2]

Id have to put Dave Cowens in over Thurmond

Yeah, you're right on that one...

[with malice]

Russell's league is FAR superior to Jordan's...
Have to say I disagree.
I think you're underplaying the impact Jordan had. He dominated because of who he was, not because the league was worse.

[jlauber]

Back in Russell's era, the players used to vote for the MVP. They voted for Russell MVP 5 times.

They even voted him MVP in 1961-62 over these players that year:

Wilt Chamberlain: 50.4ppg 25.7rpg 2.4apg 50.6%fg 61.3%ft

Oscar Robertson: 30.8ppg 12.5rpg 11.4apg 47.8%fg  80.3%ft

Elgin Baylor: 38.3ppg 18.6rpg 4.6apg 42.8%fg 75.4%ft

Jerry West: 30.8ppg 7.9rpg 5.4apg 44.5%fg 76.9%ft

Bob Pettit: 31.1ppg 18.7rpg 3.7apg 45.0%fg 77.1%ft

Richie Guerin: 29.5ppg 6.4rpg 6.9apg 44.2%fg 82.0%ft


I think winning and impact go beyond the stats. Russell's defensive impact was so valuable to those Celtics teams because some of his teammates were poor defenders. He was that good of an anchor for the defense, that his role was played to a perfection.

Perfect example for a player who needed Russell is Bob Cousy. He was a bad defender and never started winning until Russell came along.

Russell over Wilt in '61-62 was a downright DISGRACE.

Think about this...

In Wilt's rookie season, '59-60, Chamberlain took a LAST-PLACE team the year before, to a 49-26 record. In the process, he averaged 37.6 ppg, 27.0 rpg, and shot .461 (his career low, BTW, and the only time he ever shot less than .506 .) Russell and his SIX HOF teammates went 59-16, and along the way Russell averaged 18.2 ppg, 24.0 rpg, and shot a career high .467. And Chamberlain not only won ROY, he also won the MVP award.

Now, in the '61-62 season, Russell and his SIX other HOF teammates went 60-20, and in the process, Russell averaged 18.9 ppg, 23.6 rpg, and shot .457. Meanwhile, Chamberlain, with pretty much the same inept roster, led his team to a 49-31 record, and in doing so he averaged 50.4 ppg, 25.7 rpg, and shot .506 from the field.

Who won the MVP in '61-62? Somehow the players voted for Russell. Now, you tell me what changed from '60 to that '62 season? Russell and his Celtics played pretty much the SAME. Meanwhile, Wilt's Warriors played about the same, BUT, Wilt was even BETTER in '62. Considerably BETTER.

And, while the post-season wasn't factored in, all Wilt did was take that far inferior roster to a game seven, two-point loss against Russell's Celtics in the '62 ECF's. Oh, and BTW, just how much help did Wilt receive in the post-season from his teammates that season? His teammates collectively shot .354 in the playoffs in '62.

I have long maintained that many players resented Wilt's overwhelming dominance in his career. And in the '61-62 season, he was routinely hanging 50-60 point games on the league. BTW, Wilt was slighted in '63-64, and '68-69, as well. And given the fact that Russell won the award in '62, Chamberlain should have won it in '72, too. Wilt did everything that Russell accomplished in '62, only better, and yet he came in third in '72.

[jlauber]

http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/lists/Top-10-centers-in-NBA-history#photo-title=Centers%20of%20attention&photo=30115811

Reasons for the choices are in the link.

1. Bill Russell
2. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
3. Wilt Chamberlain
4. Shaquille O'Neal
5. Hakeem Olajuwon
6. Moses Malone
7. George Mikan
8. David Robinson
9. Willis Reed
10. Nate Thurmond


Depending on if you include Duncan and McAdoo at the center position...

1. Russell
2. Wilt
3. Kareem
4. Shaq
5. Duncan
6. Hakeem
7. Moses
8. Mikan
9. Robinson
10. Thurmond
11. McAdoo
12. Reed

[millwad]

Depending on if you include Duncan and McAdoo at the center position...

1. Russell
2. Wilt
3. Kareem
4. Shaq
5. Duncan
6. Hakeem
7. Moses
8. Mikan
9. Robinson
10. Thurmond
11. McAdoo
12. Reed

McAdoo was mainly a power forward so he should not be in this list, neither should the POWER FORWARD Duncan be either. If it's like that we can put we can mix it up in alot of ways, putting PG's among SG's etc which is stupidity.

And either you are stupid or you are trying your best to praise Wilt's competition..:facepalm

Thurmond was never even on any ALL-NBA during his career and you rank him ahead of both MVP Walton wh olead his team all the way to a title and multiple all NBA Ewing..:facepalm

[Niquesports]

McAdoo was mainly a power forward so he should not be in this list, neither should the POWER FORWARD Duncan be either. If it's like that we can put we can mix it up in alot of ways, putting PG's among SG's etc which is stupidity.

And either you are stupid or you are trying your best to praise Wilt's competition..:facepalm

Thurmond was never even on any ALL-NBA during his career and you rank him ahead of both MVP Walton wh olead his team all the way to a title and multiple all NBA Ewing..:facepalm


Macadoo was a Center while with the Braves his best years. he became a more combo C/PF with the lakers . Thurmond was just a very solid C never the player that could lead a team to greatness.Walton had 1 1/2 year of elite play This just doesnt get him in a top 10 ranking.Ewing is a guy that gets hurt most. If the Knicks put just 1 other all star player with him the Knicks would had won at least 1 or 2 titles.

[millwad]

Macadoo was a Center while with the Braves his best years. he became a more combo C/PF with the lakers . Thurmond was just a very solid C never the player that could lead a team to greatness.Walton had 1 1/2 year of elite play This just doesnt get him in a top 10 ranking.Ewing is a guy that gets hurt most. If the Knicks put just 1 other all star player with him the Knicks would had won at least 1 or 2 titles.

It's a good start to know how to spell the guy's name, it's McAdoo and nothing else.

Thurmond never even made an ALL-NBA team, he has no case what so ever against Walton or Ewing. Walton won it all as his teams main player and won FINALS MVP and NBA MVP while Thurmond never even made an ALL-NBA team.

Ewing made 7 ALL-NBA teams, 7 more than Thurmond and he was an 11-time all-star compared to Thurmond's 7. Although Thurmond made it to the finals once it was due Rick Barry absolutely dominating and averaging 19 more points per game than Thurmond in the playoffs. And not only that, the way to the finals they faced pathetic competition, first a Laker team who only won 36 games and then a Hawk team who only won 39 games.

And it's funny that you claim that Ewing always was injured, Thurmond himself missed 14 games per season as an average during his career which is more missed games per season compared to Ewing..:facepalm

And McAdoo was still mainly a PF..

[jlauber]

McAdoo was mainly a power forward so he should not be in this list, neither should the POWER FORWARD Duncan be either. If it's like that we can put we can mix it up in alot of ways, putting PG's among SG's etc which is stupidity.

And either you are stupid or you are trying your best to praise Wilt's competition..:facepalm

Thurmond was never even on any ALL-NBA during his career and you rank him ahead of both MVP Walton wh olead his team all the way to a title and multiple all NBA Ewing..:facepalm

Ewing has a case ahead of Thurmond, but, unfortunately for BOTH, they played in the era of some truly great centers. Ewing was never better than the third best center in the league, and was, quite probably the 4th best for most of his career. He had to battle an aging Kareem and a young Hakeem for most of the 80's, and then a prime Hakeem, D-Rob, and Shaq in the 90's.

As for Thurmond, he played in the era of a prime Russell and a prime Wilt in the 60's, and then an aging Wilt and a prime Kareem in the 70's. Nate was never more than the third best center of his era, and some would place Reed and Cowens above him, as well.

Still, Nate being 4th behind Russell, Wilt, and a prime Kareem is more impressive, at least IMHO, than Ewing being 5th best behind Shaq, Hakeem, a aged Kareem, and Robinson. Russell, Wilt, and Kareem are generally near the top of most all-time lists.

Ewing was a better offensive player, to be sure, but Thurmond is arguably the 2nd or 3rd best defensive center (and player) in NBA history. I suspect that BOTH Wilt and Kareem would have acknowledged that he was their toughest defender. And Thurmond was among the greatest rebounders in NBA history, as well.

I did preface my arguments for both Duncan and McAdoo. IMHO, both were more centers than PF's, at least for much of their careers. McAdoo was primarily a center on defense, and more like a PF (with SG range) on the offensive end. He was a nightmare for any defender, though. He was too quick, and had too much range for most all of his opposing centers, and he was too big, and usually quicker, than most all of the PF's he was guarded by.

Duncan seemed to post up more than even Robinson, and after Robinson retired, Duncan was the anchor on the defensive end.

Still, I wouldn't have a problem labeling either a PF. But, they were both more than that, though.

Walton COULD have had a brilliant career, but really only a couple of dominating seasons does not make a career. Cowens, Reed, and even Unseld probably have better career credentials.

[Niquesports]

Ewing has a case ahead of Thurmond, but, unfortunately for BOTH, they played in the era of some truly great centers. Ewing was never better than the third best center in the league, and was, quite probably the 4th best for most of his career. He had to battle an aging Kareem and a young Hakeem for most of the 80's, and then a prime Hakeem, D-Rob, and Shaq in the 90's.

As for Thurmond, he played in the era of a prime Russell and a prime Wilt in the 60's, and then an aging Wilt and a prime Kareem in the 70's. Nate was never more than the third best center of his era, and some would place Reed and Cowens above him, as well.

Still, Nate being 4th behind Russell, Wilt, and a prime Kareem is more impressive, at least IMHO, than Ewing being 5th best behind Shaq, Hakeem, a aged Kareem, and Robinson. Russell, Wilt, and Kareem are generally near the top of most all-time lists.

Ewing was a better offensive player, to be sure, but Thurmond is arguably the 2nd or 3rd best defensive center (and player) in NBA history. I suspect that BOTH Wilt and Kareem would have acknowledged that he was their toughest defender. And Thurmond was among the greatest rebounders in NBA history, as well.

I did preface my arguments for both Duncan and McAdoo. IMHO, both were more centers than PF's, at least for much of their careers. McAdoo was primarily a center on defense, and more like a PF (with SG range) on the offensive end. He was a nightmare for any defender, though. He was too quick, and had too much range for most all of his opposing centers, and he was too big, and usually quicker, than most all of the PF's he was guarded by.

Duncan seemed to post up more than even Robinson, and after Robinson retired, Duncan was the anchor on the defensive end.

Still, I wouldn't have a problem labeling either a PF. But, they were both more than that, though.

Walton COULD have had a brilliant career, but really only a couple of dominating seasons does not make a career. Cowens, Reed, and even Unseld probably have better career credentials.

I agree with most of your post.

Walton too often gets rated on what he could had done instead of what he did.
Thurmond was just a garbage man C did all the dirty work.if he played on a flashy team like ewing with the knicks he would still had been in the shadowa of Wilt Russ and kareem. But he would get more respect.

Ewing was just a solid player.If the Knicks had beat Houston in the finals Ewing would be rated a little higher. He can thank John Starks .I personally would take Ewing over D Rob.

[D.J.]

If the Knicks had beat Houston in the finals Ewing would be rated a little higher. He can thank John Starks .I personally would take Ewing over D Rob.


Starks likely would have won Finals MVP had the Knicks won.

[Legends66NBA7]

Starks likely would have won Finals MVP had the Knicks won.

In Game 7, he surely tried to gun for it.

[Niquesports]

In Game 7, he surely tried to gun for it.


I cant think of one championship team John Starks would start on . In the past 50 years as a SG.

[millwad]

I cant think of one championship team John Starks would start on . In the past 50 years as a SG.

You gotta be kidding...:facepalm
To start with, he'd be the starting SG in Houston in '94 easily. I take him over Mad Max any day in the week considering the fact that Maxwell in the '94 playoffs averaged 13.8 points on 37%.

He gets too much crap for having a horrible game 7, in the finals that year he had an average of 17.7 points, 5.9 assists, 3.1 rebounds and 1.6 steals which is easily more dominant than what Maxwell put up.

And it's not Starks fault that Ewing got outplayed through out the whole series by Olajuwon..

[millwad]

And still, Thurmond, McAdoo and Duncan doesn't have anything on Ewing. Thurmond was just not good enough and Duncan and McAdoo can't be on both the PF-list and Center-list.

Obvious try to by Jlauber to make Wilt's competition look better.

[Niquesports]

You gotta be kidding...:facepalm
To start with, he'd be the starting SG in Houston in '94 easily. I take him over Mad Max any day in the week considering the fact that Maxwell in the '94 playoffs averaged 13.8 points on 37%.

He gets too much crap for having a horrible game 7, in the finals that year he had an average of 17.7 points, 5.9 assists, 3.1 rebounds and 1.6 steals which is easily more dominant than what Maxwell put up.

And it's not Starks fault that Ewing got outplayed through out the whole series by Olajuwon..

Starks is a CBA player that got a chance. He was a shooter and thats it. Give Ewing Miller Mullin Even max he gets at least 1 ring. Starks are you kidding is he in your family. The guy was a BUm

[millwad]

Starks is a CBA player that got a chance. He was a shooter and thats it. Give Ewing Miller Mullin Even max he gets at least 1 ring. Starks are you kidding is he in your family. The guy was a BUm

You're just retarded, seriously.
So what that he was a CBA-player? So you have to be a starplayer from start or do you have to get picked high to be a big deal in the NBA? Ben Wallace was never drafted and he became one of the best defensive bigs of all-time..

John Starks was not a bum, an ignorant troll on internet calling a former NBA All-Star a "bum"..:facepalm

The guy averaged 19 points and 6 assists the same year the Knicks made it to the finals and made the all-star team. The same so called bum averaged almost 18 points and 6 assists in the NBA FINALS and he shot with a higher FG% then Ewing. Sure, Starks had a horrible game 7 but the real difference maker in this series was Ewing getting toy'd by Hakeem and in game 6 where Starks made 27 points and 8 assists, Ewing only managed to make 6 of 20 shots and that game was decided in the last second of the game.

Starks was a baller.

[Niquesports]

You're just retarded, seriously.
So what that he was a CBA-player? So you have to be a starplayer from start or do you have to get picked high to be a big deal in the NBA? Ben Wallace was never drafted and he became one of the best defensive bigs of all-time..

John Starks was not a bum, an ignorant troll on internet calling a former NBA All-Star a "bum"..:facepalm

The guy averaged 19 points and 6 assists the same year the Knicks made it to the finals and made the all-star team. The same so called bum averaged almost 18 points and 6 assists in the NBA FINALS and he shot with a higher FG% then Ewing. Sure, Starks had a horrible game 7 but the real difference maker in this series was Ewing getting toy'd by Hakeem and in game 6 where Starks made 27 points and 8 assists, Ewing only managed to make 6 of 20 shots and that game was decided in the last second of the game.

Starks was a baller.


Like I said I'd take any other Sg in the past 50 years over Starks on a championship team. The Knicks never gave Ewing a strong supporting cast. You mentioned Ben Wallace. He has played for 4 teams and for 3 of them he was just a below avg player. Sure he was great with the Pistons but his other years show more of what he really was a below avg player. Starks just name a SG he was better than Ok you said Max Id take max over Starks any day. By the way Wilt many times out played Russ when it cameto stats but the team and the players around Russ was why they won. Ewing didnt have that .

[millwad]

Like I said I'd take any other Sg in the past 50 years over Starks on a championship team. The Knicks never gave Ewing a strong supporting cast. You mentioned Ben Wallace. He has played for 4 teams and for 3 of them he was just a below avg player. Sure he was great with the Pistons but his other years show more of what he really was a below avg player. Starks just name a SG he was better than Ok you said Max Id take max over Starks any day. By the way Wilt many times out played Russ when it cameto stats but the team and the players around Russ was why they won. Ewing didnt have that .

Wilt and his stats can't be compared to others, like the season when he averaged 50 points per game he was not the MVP, Russell was and there's a huge difference between getting outscored and outplayed.

I will not argue about Ben Wallace, but he has a place in history as one of the greatest defensive big men of all-time in his prime.

And regarding Maxwell, I am pretty sure you never saw him play. He was a nutcase and he was extremely unreliable as a player and had huge ups and downs, only a fool would pick Maxwell over Starks, honestly. And haha, so you'd rather have 35 year old former CBA-player Mario Elie who won with the Spurs in '99 over Starks..:facepalm

[D-Wade316]

My top 6:
1. Wilt
2. Russell
3. Kareem
4. Shaq
5. Mikan (in b4 the haters)
6. Hakeem

[millwad]

My top 6:
1. Wilt
2. Russell
3. Kareem
4. Shaq
5. Mikan (in b4 the haters)
6. Hakeem

:facepalm

[D-Wade316]

:facepalm
Oh look! The guy who said Hakeem has a case for GOAT. :facepalm

[millwad]

Oh look! The guy who said Hakeem has a case for GOAT. :facepalm

I never said Hakeem has a case for GOAT, I said PRIME Hakeem was just as good as anyone else. I don't even think Hakeem is the best center to start with, no way, I have Kareem at the first spot..

Have you now got yourself a mind of your own or are you still Jlauber's buttyboy?

"JLAUBER, I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO WRITE NOW, HEEEELP!" - D-Wade316

[Yung D-Will]

I never said Hakeem has a case for GOAT, I said PRIME Hakeem was just as good as anyone else. I don't even think Hakeem is the best center to start with, no way, I have Kareem at the first spot..


Yea that's another thing I agree on when you talk about Prime Shaq and Prime Hakeem I think they were as good as any center to play the game ( Or maybe any player) Including Kareem ext. However what limited Shaq on an all time basis was the fact he had an ego, Never worked on his weakness and got fat in like 03. What limited Hakeem was the fact he had this long drought where he kept getting eliminated early and didn't make it back to the finals until like 94 and also he never could win until Jordan retired.

You take away those aspects of their career and people would be arguing them as the G.O.A.T Centers. But at their peak they were as good as anyone else

[jlauber]

Like I said I'd take any other Sg in the past 50 years over Starks on a championship team. The Knicks never gave Ewing a strong supporting cast. You mentioned Ben Wallace. He has played for 4 teams and for 3 of them he was just a below avg player. Sure he was great with the Pistons but his other years show more of what he really was a below avg player. Starks just name a SG he was better than Ok you said Max Id take max over Starks any day. By the way Wilt many times out played Russ when it cameto stats but the team and the players around Russ was why they won. Ewing didnt have that .

No other all-time great probably ever had to deal with such poor post-season play from teammates, as much as Wilt.

He had FIVE post-seasons in which his teammates collectively shot...get this... .382, .354, .352, .352, and .332. Included in that was his 65-66 76ers who had the best record in the league, but they completely fell apart in the playoffs, shooting a miserable .352 (while all Wilt did was average 28 ppg, 30 rpg, and shoot .509 ).


Wilt and his stats can't be compared to others, like the season when he averaged 50 points per game he was not the MVP, Russell was and there's a huge difference between getting outscored and outplayed.

Russell beating Wilt out in the '62 MVP was a DISGRACE. Chamberlain not only overwhelmed the entire NBA, he did so with what was basically the same last-place roster he joined two years earlier. And, while post-season play was not considered in the voting, just how in the hell did Wilt get that inept squad to a game seven, two-point loss, in the ECF's against a 60-20 Celtic team with SEVEN HOFers...and with his teammates colectively shooting .354 in the post-season????

As for the rest of your comment...you finally got it. Wilt OUTPLAYED Kareem in the '72 WCF's, despite being outscored. Kareem couldn't hit the broadside of a barn in the last four games of that series (shooting a horrid .414 over that span...and watching helplessly as Wilt knocked the "unblockable" sky hook all over the court.) Think about that...Kareem, in arguably his greatest regular season, in which he averaged 34.8 ppg on .574 shooting, being reduced to an awful .414 shooter in the last four pivotal games of that series (and .457 overall...or way less than hundred points under his regular season.)

And before you spout the nonsense about Kareem outshooting Wilt in that series, .457 to .452...Wilt missed a TOTAL of 20 shots...while Kareem misfired on 107. And, of course, Wilt thoroughly outplayed Kareem in the clinching game six win.

And a couple of other points. You constantly harp on the fact that Wilt did not lead his team in scoring in his two title runs? SO WHAT? He was, BY FAR, their most CLUTCH scorer in BOTH runs (even in '72 when he hardly shot the ball.) AND, how many times did Hakeem lead his team in scoring in the post-season...and they were eliminated in the FIRST ROUND? Chamberlain PROVED that he could score if need be. He dominated both Russell and Thurmond in the clinching game wins in '67, and then he dominated both Kareem and Lucas in the clinching game wins in '72.

[millwad]

No other all-time great probably ever had to deal with such poor post-season play from teammates, as much as Wilt.

He had FIVE post-seasons in which his teammates collectively shot...get this... .382, .354, .352, .352, and .332. Included in that was his 65-66 76ers who had the best record in the league, but they completely fell apart in the playoffs, shooting a miserable .352 (while all Wilt did was average 28 ppg, 30 rpg, and shoot .509 ).

Bla bla bla, BUHU... He is not the only player who had crappy teammates some years of his career and when he finally won he had amazing teammates so the teammate BS is just lame, I don't respect that at all. You're talking about a guy who first won when he had 4 guys who averaged 15 points or more in the playoffs where Hal Greer averaged the most at 27 points per game.

Then he won with the Lakers who had 2 HOF:ers beside Wilt and he played with where freaking 3 of his teammates averaged 19 or more points per game in the playoffs.



As for the rest of your comment...you finally got it. Wilt OUTPLAYED Kareem in the '72 WCF's, despite being outscored. Kareem couldn't hit the broadside of a barn in the last four games of that series (shooting a horrid .414 over that span...and watching helplessly as Wilt knocked the "unblockable" sky hook all over the court.) Think about that...Kareem, in arguably his greatest regular season, in which he averaged 34.8 ppg on .574 shooting, being reduced to an awful .414 shooter in the last four pivotal games of that series (and .457 overall...or way less than hundred points under his regular season.)

Haha, you're an idiot. So when Wilt outscores someone it's pure domination like when Russell got the MVP in the season where Wilt statpadded 50 points per game. But when he gets outscored with 23 points per game on better FG% it's suddenly Wilt who dominated his opponent..:facepalm




And before you spout the nonsense about Kareem outshooting Wilt in that series, .457 to .452...Wilt missed a TOTAL of 20 shots...while Kareem misfired on 107. And, of course, Wilt thoroughly outplayed Kareem in the clinching game six win.

And Kareem averaged 23 points more per game, you idiot, on better FG%. So not only did Wilt get outscored with 23 points per game, he only managed to make like 10.8 points per game during that series on pathetic 0.452%. Someone who shoots that few shots are obviously only taking the open looks and still he both got outscored with 23 points per game and Wilt shot with a worse FG%...



And a couple of other points. You constantly harp on the fact that Wilt did not lead his team in scoring in his two title runs? SO WHAT? He was, BY FAR, their most CLUTCH scorer in BOTH runs (even in '72 when he hardly shot the ball.) AND, how many times did Hakeem lead his team in scoring in the post-season...and they were eliminated in the FIRST ROUND? Chamberlain PROVED that he could score if need be. He dominated both Russell and Thurmond in the clinching game wins in '67, and then he dominated both Kareem and Lucas in the clinching game wins in '72.

Again you're so pathetic, you're just as old man with the mind of a kid. Why are you trying to make a comeback by writing something about Hakeem? Like grow up already.. Don't be so butthurt.

And you are more than welcome to mention the years Hakeem should have won more series in the playoffs while playing with the scrubs he played with..:facepalm

Hakeem still won just as many titles as Wilt and he did it while being more dominant and he did it with way less help. While Wilt had all-stars and hall of famers by his side when he finally won, Hakeem had a bunch of role players minus an old non-prime Clyde. In 1994 Hakeem won while having Maxwell as his 2nd best scorer who averaged 13.8 points per game on 37% shooting, when was the last time Wilt won anything at all with a 2nd best scorer like that? :facepalm

[D.J.]

Starks is a CBA player that got a chance. He was a shooter and thats it. Give Ewing Miller Mullin Even max he gets at least 1 ring. Starks are you kidding is he in your family. The guy was a BUm


Now you just further proved my point when I told you to educate yourself. Starks was an All-Star in '94, putting up 19/6. He also had seasons of 17/5 and 15/5, and was regularly putting up 13-14/4. In game 6 against Houston, Starks put up 27/8 and shot 5/9 from downtown. Ewing cost him Finals MVP with a 6/20 shooting performance in a game that was decided by only 2 points. Ewing shoots anything remotely close to 50%, the Knicks win and Starks is Finals MVP.

[BlueandGold]

I agree with the people who state that Bill should definitely not be #1 but somewhere in the top3 - top5 range.

Kareem and Wilt should be 1 and 2 respectively.

[Niquesports]

Now you just further proved my point when I told you to educate yourself. Starks was an All-Star in '94, putting up 19/6. He also had seasons of 17/5 and 15/5, and was regularly putting up 13-14/4. In game 6 against Houston, Starks put up 27/8 and shot 5/9 from downtown. Ewing cost him Finals MVP with a 6/20 shooting performance in a game that was decided by only 2 points. Ewing shoots anything remotely close to 50%, the Knicks win and Starks is Finals MVP.


Again name a SG from another championship team that you would take Starks over.

[D.J.]

Again name a SG from another championship team that you would take Starks over.


DeShawn Stevenson/Jason Terry
Mario Elie
Vernon Maxwell
Byron Scott

[millwad]

DeShawn Stevenson/Jason Terry
Mario Elie
Vernon Maxwell
Byron Scott

He doesn't listen, he's an idiot and he claims that he's been watching basketball since the 70's, yeaaaah right..:facepalm

And obviously he never saw the series against Houston to start with, Maxwell has nothing on Starks..

[Niquesports]

DeShawn Stevenson/Jason Terry
Mario Elie
Vernon Maxwell
Byron Scott


I would take mario and Max over Starks any day. Its not even close between Starks and Byron Scott. You are really overrating the ex CBA player Starks.

[Jasi]

For me:

1. KAJ
2. Russell

3rd tier
Wilt, Shaq, Hakeem, Mikan

4th tier
Robinson, Ewing, Reed, Moses, Sabonis (<-- Yeah I know)

[millwad]

I would take mario and Max over Starks any day. Its not even close between Starks and Byron Scott. You are really overrating the ex CBA player Starks.

Haha, the funny thing is that Mario Elie was a former CBA player too, haha...:facepalm

[DaPerceive]

For me:

1. KAJ
2. Russell

3rd tier
Wilt, Shaq, Hakeem, Mikan

4th tier
Ewing, Reed, Moses, Sabonis (<-- Yeah I know)
No Robinson? :banghead: Robinson is arguably better than everyone in the 4th tier. I would say Robinson was better than everyone there not named Moses Malone.

[Jasi]

No Robinson? :banghead: Robinson is arguably better than everyone in the 4th tier. I would say Robinson was better than everyone there not named Moses Malone.

You're perfectly right, I just forgot him. My bad.
I've edited now.

[D.J.]

I would take mario and Max over Starks any day. Its not even close between Starks and Byron Scott. You are really overrating the ex CBA player Starks.


:facepalm You're a f*cking idiot. Mario Elie didn't play in 30 minutes a game except for 2 seasons. He was a spot up shooter.

Starks LIT UP Maxwell in games 1-6. And Maxwell was a sub 40% career shooter, uncluding shooting under 40% in both of the Rockets' championship seasons.

Byron Scott played with Magic Johnson spoonfeeding him easy buckets and he still broke 20 PPG only once and averaged over 17 PPG only twice. And he was playing 36-37 MPG at his peak. Put him on any other team and watch those points come down.

Starks was putting up better numbers per 48 minutes. Starks had several seasons where he was putting up 13-14 PPG in just 26-27 MPG. He was a better all-around player and a better defender than the guys mentioned earlier. And he also was an All-Star, something Byron never was. And putting up his numbers 1)In less playing time and 2)On a very slow paced, defensive minded team. So, in conclusion:


Starks > Elie
Starks > Maxwell
Starks > Scott

[Niquesports]

:facepalm You're a f*cking idiot. Mario Elie didn't play in 30 minutes a game except for 2 seasons. He was a spot up shooter.

Starks LIT UP Maxwell in games 1-6. And Maxwell was a sub 40% career shooter, uncluding shooting under 40% in both of the Rockets' championship seasons.

Byron Scott played with Magic Johnson spoonfeeding him easy buckets and he still broke 20 PPG only once and averaged over 17 PPG only twice. And he was playing 36-37 MPG at his peak. Put him on any other team and watch those points come down.

Starks was putting up better numbers per 48 minutes. Starks had several seasons where he was putting up 13-14 PPG in just 26-27 MPG. He was a better all-around player and a better defender than the guys mentioned earlier. And he also was an All-Star, something Byron never was. And putting up his numbers 1)In less playing time and 2)On a very slow paced, defensive minded team. So, in conclusion:


Starks > Elie
Starks > Maxwell
Starks > Scott


You call me a idiot. But look how dumb you look making a case on how good Starks is comparing him to Maxwell and Elie. :roll:
That was my whole point. Starks is a below avg SG.Put Reggie Miller or Mitch Richmond on those Knicks team and they beat Houston. Hope you feel better Starks is better than Elie
:applause:

[millwad]

You call me a idiot. But look how dumb you look making a case on how good Starks is comparing him to Maxwell and Elie. :roll:
That was my whole point. Starks is a below avg SG.Put Reggie Miller or Mitch Richmond on those Knicks team and they beat Houston. Hope you feel better Starks is better than Elie
:applause:

Haha, you were the idiot who wrote that no winning team the last 50 years had no worse SG than Starks. And you're the idiot who would pick Maxwell and Elie over Starks.

Hope YOU feel better now when everyone knows you're a joke.

[D.J.]

That was my whole point. Starks is a below avg SG.Put Reggie Miller or Mitch Richmond on those Knicks team and they beat Houston. Hope you feel better Starks is better than Elie
:applause:


:roll: A below average SG putting up 13-14 PPG in less than 30 MPG and making the All-Star team in one season. Yeah, real below average. Starks, Ewing, and Pat Riley all share equal blame for not getting the job done. Starks for his massive choke job in game 7, Ewing for his 6/20 shooting in game 6 in a 2 point loss, and Riley for not yanking Starks in favor of Greg Anthony.

[hammer2010]

Wow 33 of a possible 61 titles in Nba history have been won by these players and no two of them ever played on the same team. Amazing!! People wonder why teams are built around centers. :bowdown: :bowdown:

[nayte]

http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/lists/Top-10-centers-in-NBA-history#photo-title=Centers%20of%20attention&photo=30115811

Reasons for the choices are in the link.

1. Bill Russell
2. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
3. Wilt Chamberlain
4. Shaquille O'Neal
5. Hakeem Olajuwon
6. Moses Malone
7. George Mikan
8. David Robinson
9. Willis Reed
10. Nate Thurmond

Moses and Hakeem could be an interesting debate..I thought Ewing might make it tho..

[Niquesports]

:roll: A below average SG putting up 13-14 PPG in less than 30 MPG and making the All-Star team in one season. Yeah, real below average. Starks, Ewing, and Pat Riley all share equal blame for not getting the job done. Starks for his massive choke job in game 7, Ewing for his 6/20 shooting in game 6 in a 2 point loss, and Riley for not yanking Starks in favor of Greg Anthony.


I never blamed Starks for Ewing never winning a title. I blamed the Knicks for not building around him to make a championship team. Wow how good would the knicks had been with say Mitch Richmond, who the Warriors did trade, so why couldnt the Knicks get him ? Rich and Starks coming off the bench with instant offense wow.

[Niquesports]

Moses and Hakeem could be an interesting debate..I thought Ewing might make it tho..


I would have to put Dave Cowens in this .

[millwad]

I would have to put Dave Cowens in this .

Cowens has nothing on either of them, he didn't even make an ALL-NBA first team during his whole career and though he won twice in the finals he never won any FMVP..

[Niquesports]

Cowens has nothing on either of them, he didn't even make an ALL-NBA first team during his whole career and though he won twice in the finals he never won any FMVP..


From 74 to 76 Cowens might hve been the best Center in Basketball. Yes Kareem Mac but Cowens was right there .

[millwad]

From 74 to 76 Cowens might hve been the best Center in Basketball. Yes Kareem Mac but Cowens was right there .

Nope, Kareem was.

And for someone who claims Cowens has a case for being in the top 10, which he doesn't, it's interesting that you mention 3 years where he only made the ALL-NBA team twice, while both being on the 2nd team. It's also interesting that you didn't mention his MVP season, haha..

[DaPerceive]

What is interesting is that Wilt could be argued from anywhere from 1 to 5. You could argue that he was the greatest although I don't because it would almost go against everything I stand for. You could also argue that he was inferior to all Russell, Olajuwon, Shaq, and Kareem. The top 5 centers have always been the same and they probably always will be. The order is of the top 5 is the discussion.

Moses is not in the discussion for top 5 because he wasn't even half the defender those other five were.



Ewing was just a solid player.If the Knicks had beat Houston in the finals Ewing would be rated a little higher. He can thank John Starks .I personally would take Ewing over D Rob.
There is nothing wrong with preferring Ewing on your team over Robinson. However, there isn't much of an argument that Ewing should be above Robinson in the all-time lists though. Ewing wasn't greater or better than Robinson.

[jlauber]

What is interesting is that Wilt could be argued from anywhere from 1 to 5. You could argue that he was the greatest although I don't because it would almost go against everything I stand for. You could also argue that he was inferior to all Russell, Olajuwon, Shaq, and Kareem. The top 5 centers have always been the same and they probably always will be. The order is of the top 5 is the discussion.

Moses is not in the discussion for top 5 because he wasn't even half the defender those other five were.


There is nothing wrong with preferring Ewing on your team over Robinson. However, there isn't much of an argument that Ewing should be above Robinson in the all-time lists though. Ewing wasn't greater or better than Robinson.

Hakeem has NO case over Wilt. Wilt was simply more dominant in BOTH the regular season, covering well over 1000 games...and including the post-season, covering some 150+. And Wilt's TEAM success DWARFS Hakeem's as well.

Hakeem is well behind Russell, Kareem, Shaq, and Wilt...and is in the next tier, lumped together with Robinson and Moses. I would give Hakeem a slight edge over both, but Moses was considered more dominant by his own peers in the MVP balloting.

And let's get real here...

Hakeem won ONE MVP, and it came in a season in which MJ took the year off. Olajuwon came in second ONE time. And he finished fourth, TWO more times. That was IT. FOUR times, in 18 seasons, he was considered a TOP-FOUR player. In fact, he was onlt voted in the Top-10...on NINE occasions..or in HALF of his career.

His TEAMs seldom accomplished anything either. He NEVER led a team to a BEST RECORD. In fact, his best mark was 58-24. And, even more embarrassing was the fact that he was an integral part of EIGHT teams (in 15 playoff seasons) that were eliminated in the FIRST ROUND.

Give me the names of any other "great" that had less MVP shares, and did as poorly in terms of playoff success. You certainly won't find any Top-10 player that were as bad.

Why? Why was Hakeem so routinely considered nothing more than a borderline Top-TEN player in HIS era? We all know why. Because he was. At his best, he was very good, but let's not get carried away. Yes, he elevated his play in the post-season...BUT, in most cases the result was...FIRST ROUND exits. And he had the luxury of routinely facing non-HOF, and even non-All-Star centers. And he PROVED that he could NOT lead the league in scoring. So, the reality was, he was, at BEST, not even a 30 ppg scorer. He was an average center, at best in terms of FG%. My god, he was a 50% shooter in leagues that shot nearly 50%. And he was generally a "black hole" when receiving passes. His career apg? 2.5 apg (yes... 2.5 apg.)

He also couldn't stop the great opposing centers. Guys like Shaq not only scoring 28 ppg, but doing so on .595 shooting (and Hakeem shooting .483 against him.) Or a 38 year old Kareem who could barely get up-and-down the floor scoring 33 ppg on an eye-popping .634 FG% in FIVE H2H games...including a 46 point game, on 21-30 shooting, and in only 37 minutes (and in which the recap chastised the Rocket's coach for allowing Hakeem to be slaughtered.) Robinson even out shot Hakeem in their 42 regular season H2H's by a .488 to .441 margin.

Hakeem is WAY over-rated here. His CAREER does NOT warrant anything more than a borderline Top-10 ranking...which was generally his place in his HIS own era.

[millwad]

Jschnauzer, honestly, I used to rank Wilt at number one before I really saw him play. When I saw him play I got totally confused, his skills just wasn't as great as his stats. With those skills he would never have dominated in the 80's and the 90's or even today in terms of scoring, there's just no way a guy playing like Wilt would put up that many points. Wilt Chamberlain was a product of his own era, it's just pure stupidity from your side to claim that he would "crushed" everyone in today's era, he wouldn't. Open your eyes and watch the guy play, you're completely sticking to stats and accolades but I'm sorry, he played in an era where basketball had not developed to the standards of the modern era. It's a slap in the face to the modern era of basketball to even make a claim that the guy's from the 50's and 60's where just as good if not better than the guy's of today. Either you're just blind or you're just so coloured you can't see it, I know you at least could admit this before.

Still, if Wilt would have won more, if Wilt would have won during his statistical prime I'd take him over Olajuwon and Shaq, maybe even Kareem. But he didn't, in fact, he didn't even get the MVP in the season where he statpadded to his 50 point per game which says alot, I know you think it's disgrace that he didn't get it but I dont care, you're biased.

But now? No way. You always whine about how bad teammates Wilt had but when he had easily better teammates than Olajuwon and it's not even close, especially during his 2 title runs.

In his first run Wilt wasn't even the top scorer of his team, Greer was when he put put up 27 points per game in those playoffs. And it doesn't end with HOF Greer, Wilt also had Chet Walker putting up 21.7 points per game in those playoffs, Wali Jones putting up 17.5 points per game and finally Cunningham putting up 15 points per game. How can any great center lose with a supporting cast like that, seriously?

Give Olajuwon that kind and I'll promise you he'd have more than 2 titles. Hakeem won his first title while having Maxwell by his side as his 2nd best scorer while not even having any all-stars by his side. Maxwell put up pathetic 13.8 points on 37% shooting and still the Rockets managed to win those playoffs. So fact remains that Hakeem scored more than twice as many points per game than his team's 2nd best scorer, Hakeem put up 28.9 points per game during the 94 playoffs.

In Wilt's second run he was clearly not in his prime, defensively, yes, but no where close to his offensive prime. He averaged 14.8 points during that run and by his side he had 3 guys putting up at least 19 points per game while two of them being HOF:ers.

Hakeem during his second title run averaged 33 points per game and first crushed MVP Robinson and then swept and outplayed Shaq and the Magic.

It's not even close Jlauber, Wilt had so much more help than Hakeem by his side and it's pretty sad that he's only a 2-time champion, the same amount Hakeem is. And only a fool would claim that Hakeem wasn't more dominant during his runs, Wilt wasn't even the best center in '72, Kareem was even though you are in denial. If a guy averages 40 points on you on your position during the regular season and then outscores you with 23 points per game in the playoffs like MVP OF THE YEAR, Kareem did to Wilt you know it's pretty obvious who the best center in the league was.

It's just sad when you talk about "playoff-success" by the way, especially when the Hakeem won just as much as Wilt and I'd really like to know which years Hakeeem should have made it further in the playoffs while looking at his roster. Seriously, give me the years you think he should have made it way further because there are no years. He didn't choke in the playoffs or drop in terms of scoring and FG% like Wilt did, he raised his game big time when the playoffs came around and that's why he has the highest PPG average among all centers ever in the playoffs.

And it's funny you call Hakeem a black hole, Wilt is the same guy who averaged 40 shots per game during a whole season while dishing out 2.4 assists. And not only did Wilt drop in terms of scoring and FG%, he had a worse assist average as well. And Wilt's assists are not showing the whole truth, in his era they played the game at a faster pace which led to more possessions per game and more possessions means more opportunitites to either score or to dish the ball for the assist. And the amount of minutes he played would be lower in the modern era so when you're comparing his PER 36 minutes to other great centers he doesn't look that impressive anymore.

In fact, Hakeem's PER 36 assist average in the playoffs is higher than Wilt's so cut the BS.. How do you explain that?:facepalm

And now when you call Hakeem a black hole, that means that Shaq was a black hole as well since Hakeem and Shaq both averaged 2.5 assists per game and the difference between them was that Hakeem averaged more assists in the playoffs. You don't make any sense.

[RRR3]

millwad,
stop underrating Wilt so much. You're only doing to piss of jlauber, it's ****ing obvious.

[millwad]

millwad,
stop underrating Wilt so much. You're only doing to piss of jlauber, it's ****ing obvious.

I'm not underrating Wilt, I have him in my top 5 center list and top 5 all-time list. And I don't do anything to piss Jlauber off.

[D-Wade316]

I'm not underrating Wilt, I have him in my top 5 center list and top 5 all-time list. And I don't do anything to piss Jlauber off.
:wtf:

[RRR3]

I'm not underrating Wilt, I have him in my top 5 center list and top 5 all-time list. And I don't do anything to piss Jlauber off.
Wait... You have Hakeem top 4?:roll:

[DaPerceive]

Wait... You have Hakeem top 4?:roll:
Is there really anything wrong with that? You could argue that Hakeem was better than either or both Shaq and Wilt.

[millwad]

Is there really anything wrong with that? You could argue that Hakeem was better than either or both Shaq and Wilt.

Personally I have Kareem at first place among centers, no doubt and honestly I don't really see that anyone has a case over him. Between Shaq and Hakeem I always had a hard time ranking them, always shifted between them but I found it easier to have them at the same place.

[DaPerceive]

Personally I have Kareem at first place among centers, no doubt and honestly I don't really see that anyone has a case over him. Between Shaq and Hakeem I always had a hard time ranking them, always shifted between them but I found it easier to have them at the same place.
Bill Russell? I use to put Kareem at #1 but now I've decided to put Russell at #1 and Kareem at #2. Kareem still has a case for the greatest Center ever but I see a better and more convincing case for Russell.

1. Russell
2. Kareem
3. Shaq
4a. Wilt
4b. Hakeem

I'm trying to debate Wilt vs. Hakeem. It's hard for me to put Wilt this low but he was way too big of an underachiever in the post-season.