#50 NBA Player Of All-Time According to InsideHoops

[Deuce Bigalow]

Paul Pierce was voted the #49 NBA Player Of All-Time According to InsideHoops.

22 PPG | 6 RPG | 3.8 APG

NBA Champion
NBA Finals MVP
10

[SourPatchKids]

Rodman>Pierce

[StateOfMind12]

Finally! Paul Pierce has been enshrined as a top 50 great.

http://i.imgur.com/riEEU.gif

[OmniStrife]

Rodman!

[Young X]

Chris Paul.

[Freedom Kid7]

Hal Greer. A very damn good role player that had good longevity and was just a solid guard.

[pauk]

I vote for Reggie Miller...

Once in a while there just comes a player with so great intangibles, killer instinct, legacy, longevity, consistency and character which no on paper awards or statistics can measure.... Reggie is the #1 example... You see for example on paper his 18.2 ppg and think thats nothing special until you realise most of those points came in the 4th quarter resulting in ridicilously many clutch plays, especially in playoffs where his ppg would jump dramatically overall.... The name Reggie Miller is synonymous with clutch...... He was a guy that lived for the biggest moments and made the biggest moments....

As Reggie Miller put it: "You might make your first 10 shots and everything is going great, but when the game is on the line, those other 10 don't mean anything."

There are 6 things he is in argument for being the most successful at:

1. Shooter
2. Clutch performer
3. Competitor
4. Greatest Pacer ever
5. Greatest of the ball/screen player ever
6. Work Ethic

Reggie’s loyalty to the Pacers organization is one of the things people often overlook. Only John Stockton and Karl Malone (with Utah) played more games with one franchise than Reggie did with Indiana...

Reggie played 1,389 games. He owned that Indiana city, even more so than Peyton Manning did during his tenure there... He was the best perimeter shooter that this game has ever seen and one of the greatest clutch shooters of all-time.... He knew he was a marked man and he relished it, especially in the big stage....

Over the span of his 18 years with Indiana he has hit some kindof clutch shot in every close game... If there is any gamewinner count out there that dates way back dont be surprised if Reggie Miller as at #1 on that list.... If the basketball term "clutch" was in the dictionary then Reggie Millers picture would be next to it....

He was also a nasty competitor with the confidence of GOD and legendary trashtalking (which he always backed up) which created historic NBA drama and memories.... He could get into peoples heads like no other and once he did he would play mind tricks, he was even the only one that ever got under Jordans skin and not only once....

Jordan said: “I really don’t dislike playing against anybody in the league, but playing Reggie Miller drives me nuts.”

There is a reason this hall of famer was Michael Jordans biggest nemesis at the SG spot....

While many players hated Reggie during their playing days, they all respected him. Kobe Bryant said Reggie was the toughest player he has ever had to guard. I’m sure there are plenty of others that would agree........ and keep in mind that Kobe has played against Michael Jordan...

A Hall of Fame career is about more than how many Championship rings you have. Robert Horry has seven of them, and Adam Morrison has two. I’ll leave it at that. Who is to say Dan Marino is less of a player because he never won a Super Bowl? Sometimes people need to take a step back and look at the whole product, instead of just focusing on one piece of it.....

[BankShot]

My vote goes to Dennis Rodman

[coin24]

Rodman:cheers: greatest rebounder/defender.. Smh at how underrated he is in here:facepalm

[BankShot]

Rodman:cheers: greatest rebounder/defender.. Smh at how underrated he is in here:facepalm

Which players in the ISH Top 50 would you place him above??

[pauk]

This is just a simple question...

To you people who pick Dennis Rodman here, if you had to pick between Reggie Miller and Dennis Rodman, who would it be?

Be honest now...

I know what my answer would be, all due respect to Dennis Rodman, he also belongs here somewhere in the standings... but not ahead of Reggie in my list... no god damn way.... Rodman was not a go-to-guy, he was not a franchise player that would impact you in a way you could win unless that team already had that go-to-guy / franchise player, he was only a complimentary player TO TOP 50 PEOPLE LIKE REGGIE MILLER........

Are you really gona act like rings is what separates Rodman over Reggie? Just because he was blessed of having to play with what i consider is the greatest team ever? Switch teams where Reggie Miller would play next to Jordan for the Bulls and Rodman would play next to Pooh Richardson (who? exactly) for the Pacers and i can guarantee you he would have the same championships.... and i can guarantee you Rodman would be remembered as nothing but a rebounding showman.... Rings are overrated that way...

[Boston C's]

To hell with it im votin for ray allen lol

[DirtySanchez]

James Worthy.....

Smh Paul Peirce

[BankShot]

Miller>Rodman

If you ask me, either are perfectly plausible picks at this point in the list.... and how one chooses is partially indicative of how they view the game and how they value different facets of it.

It comes down to an All-Time defender and rebounder versus an All-Time shooter.... how one votes reflects what is valued more.

Both were multiple-time All-NBA-Third Team, and multiple-time NBA All-Stars.

Championships aside (which IMO are more out of an individual's control than we give credit for) , Rodman edges out Miller by being a two-time Defensive Player of the Year and an 8-time All-NBA-Defensive team member.

[Heavincent]

This is just a simple question...

To you people who pick Dennis Rodman here, if you had to pick between Reggie Miller and Dennis Rodman, who would it be?

Be honest now...

I know what my answer would be, all due respect to Dennis Rodman, he also belongs here somewhere in the standings... but not ahead of Reggie in my list... no god damn way.... Rodman was not a go-to-guy, he was not a franchise player that would impact you in a way you could win unless that team already had that go-to-guy / franchise player, he was only a complimentary player TO TOP 50 PEOPLE LIKE REGGIE MILLER........

Are you really gona act like rings is what separates Rodman over Reggie? Just because he was blessed of having to play with what i consider is the greatest team ever? Switch teams where Reggie Miller would play next to Jordan for the Bulls and Rodman would play next to Pooh Richardson (who? exactly) for the Pacers and i can guarantee you he would have the same championships.... and i can guarantee you Rodman would be remembered as nothing but a rebounding showman.... Rings are overrated that way...


Why not vote for Ray Allen then?

[DirtySanchez]

James Worthy
Reggie Miller
Nate Thurmond

All deserve to be top 50

[fsvr54]

Thurmond or Worthy

[KOBE143]

LeBron

2x finals loss
.5 cheap ring in lock out season
One of the greatest choker of all time.. Maybe 2nd to Wilt..
Quit in Game 5 of 2nd round PO against Celtics..
Choke against the Mavs and had one of the worst finals performance of all time..
Known as the 4th quarter choker..
And many many more.....

This is the place where he belong.. Only LeBron :bowdown: People who disagree are just haters..

[pauk]

If you ask me, either are perfectly plausible picks at this point in the list.... and how one chooses is partially indicative of how they view the game and how they value different facets of it.

It comes down to an All-Time defender and rebounder versus an All-Time shooter.... how one votes reflects what is valued more.

Both were multiple-time All-NBA-Third Team, and multiple-time NBA All-Stars.

Championships aside (which IMO are more out of an individual's control than we give credit for) , Rodman edges out Miller by being a two-time Defensive Player of the Year and an 8-time All-NBA-Defensive team member.

Is there any "Clutch player of the Year" or "Closer of the Year"?

No.... and if there was Reggie would have plenty, even while Michael Jordan would be playing...

See where i am going? There is no award for every impactful category which should hypothetically boost your career... Majority of players you could go ahead and compare awards with.... but Reggie, you just cant, same goes for many other players and the best example is Elgin Baylor... Thankfully in Elgins case it all is recognised (and ofcourse his stats help), but Reggie continues to get underrated... and when he is recognised and lets say placed in some top 50 list then he is called "overrated" because some people were unfortunate to thoroughly see him play, so i can understand why they cant understand....

[BankShot]

Is there any "Clutch player of the Year" or "Closer of the Year"?

No.... and if there was Reggie would have plenty, even while Michael Jordan would be playing...

See where i am going? There is no award for every impactful category which should hypothetically boost your career... Majority of players you could go ahead and compare awards with.... but Reggie, you just cant, same goes for many other players and the best example is Elgin Baylor...

I'm not saying either are a definitely better choice, or that your rationale for choosing Miller is unfounded or irrational.... I just personally value elite defensive versatility and rebounding more than shooting.

For the record, I wasn't using his selections to all-defense teams and DPOY awards as an argument.... but they are more-so an indicator of his legacy as an all-time, all-world, elite defender.

[StateOfMind12]

I use to say Ray was better than Reggie but I'm starting to have second thoughts about it.

Ray had more ability and could do more than Reggie could but it's not like Ray was Lebron. Both were primarily shooters/scorers that could score off the ball and within the flow of the offense. However, Miller was much much much better than Ray at scoring when it came to scoring in the clutch and in the post-season. Ray was actually somewhat of a choker.

I don't think either deserve this spot though but with the Ray vs. Reggie comparison going in this thread, I just wanted to drop my 2 cents on the comparison.

[IGotACoolStory]

Worthy

[StateOfMind12]

James Worthy
Reggie Miller
Nate Thurmond

All deserve to be top 50
None of them are better than Pierce but of the three Worthy has the best argument.

I'm not sure who I would vote for at #50. I'm undecided between Dwight Howard, Pau Gasol, Chris Paul, and James Worthy.

lol at Rodman being voted above those guys.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Dwight Howard

[coin24]

None of them are better than Pierce but of the three Worthy has the best argument.

I'm not sure who I would vote for at #50. I'm undecided between Dwight Howard, Pau Gasol, and James Worthy.

lol at Rodman being voted above those guys.


I'm a lakers fan and in no universe is Gasol better than Rodman all time...
Dwight has an argument but its too early in his career..

[StateOfMind12]

I'm a lakers fan and in no universe is Gasol better than Rodman all time...
Dwight has an argument but its too early in his career..
You are probably the type of Lakers fan that hates everyone on the team except Kobe so I'm not really sure if I should take you that seriously about it.

[Boston C's]

I use to say Ray was better than Reggie but I'm starting to have second thoughts about it.

Ray had more ability and could do more than Reggie could but it's not like Ray was Lebron. Both were primarily shooters/scorers that could score off the ball and within the flow of the offense. However, Miller was much much much better than Ray at scoring when it came to scoring in the clutch and in the post-season. Ray was actually somewhat of a choker.

I don't think either deserve this spot though but with the Ray vs. Reggie comparison going in this thread, I just wanted to drop my 2 cents on the comparison.

rays does literally everything better then reggie and his accomplishments back him up his accomplishments are better then reggie as well as his game there should be no arguement...personally i dont even think ray, reggie, or pierce deserve a top 50 spot but then again iverson was voted in at 36 lol ...and i dont understand the choker label on ray at all...in his prime he carried some underachieving teams extremely far as well as raising his game in the playoffs so idk where the choker label comes from

[StateOfMind12]

rays does literally everything better then reggie and his accomplishments back him up his accomplishments are better then reggie as well as his game there should be no arguement...personally i dont even think ray, reggie, or pierce deserve a top 50 spot but then again iverson was voted in at 36 lol ...and i dont understand the choker label on ray at all...in his prime he carried some underachieving teams extremely far as well as raising his game in the playoffs so idk where the choker label comes from
I suggest you take a look at his playoff performances especially as a Celtic from 2008-2010.

2008 - Ray Allen was playing like hot garbage until the NBA finals. In the ECSF vs. the Cavs, Ray scored less than 10 ppg and wasn't even the 3rd leading scorer on the team, KG, Pierce, and even Rondo averaged more ppg than Ray did in that series.

The only reason why that series went to 7 games was because of how bad Ray played. If he played better than that, that series would have went to 5 games max. It shouldn't have went to 7 games but it did due to how poorly Ray played.

Ray vs. 2008 Cavs in ECSF- 9.3 ppg, 32.8% FG, 16.7% 3P.

2009 - Ray Allen plays like hot garbage against the Orlando Magic. This was the series where JJ Redick made a name for himself. In the past, people considered Redick a bust, a joke, and practically the Adam Morrison of the league. JJ Reddick literally shut down Ray in that series.

Ray vs. 2009 Magic in ECSF - 13.1 ppg, 34.4% FG, 19% from 3.

2010 - Ray Allen flames out in the Finals. He had a historic performance in Game 2 of the Finals but was invisible for the rest of the series. He shot 0/13 in Game 3 and 3/14 in Game 7.

Ray vs. 2010 Lakers in NBA Finals - 14.6 ppg, 36.7% FG, 29.3% from 3.


The choking label is warranted for Ray.

[G.O.A.T]

Pierce is the only player not in my top fifty who made this top 50.

He's very close for me, around #58 or so, but I had Thurmond and Dwight Howard in my top ten.

Obviously both were much better than Pierce at their peaks, but Pierce being a modern player who recently won a title, it makes sense that if a few informed fans felt he was top 50, a lot of uninformed fans would be inclined to agree over a players whose career is just peaking potentially and another guy who they didn't previously know existed.

Good work Deuce Bigelow, took you off my ignore list for your efforts. You should keep this going up to whatever number until the season starts...

My vote here is Thurmond...Howard I rate slightly higher, but for the sake of this years list, I'd rather pay homage to the guy whose career is long complete. Both were the physical specimens of their era. Small waists, huge chests and the build and definition of a man a foot shorter in peak form.

[G.O.A.T]

None of them (Thurmond, Miller, Worthy) are better than Pierce but of the three Worthy has the best argument. .

Thurmond certainly has a better case than Worthy and Pierce. Worthy and Pierce should be very close IMO. U have them both right around 60.

But Thurmond, unlike those two, proved he could be a franchise player.

In 1967 he was second in the MVP vote and lead the Warriors to the NBA Finals. That was his fourth season. Nine years later, in a limited role, he was still helping a team (The Cleveland Cavaliers of all shitty teams) to the conference finals by anchoring a defense like less than ten other players in NBA history could.

Thurmond had a higher peak, that alone puts him in the debate with a guy like Pierce. Thurmond never won a title, but got close a lot more often than Pierce and unlike Pierce could lead a team that had a chance at winning the title.

[pauk]

I use to say Ray was better than Reggie but I'm starting to have second thoughts about it.

Ray had more ability and could do more than Reggie could but it's not like Ray was Lebron. Both were primarily shooters/scorers that could score off the ball and within the flow of the offense. However, Miller was much much much better than Ray at scoring when it came to scoring in the clutch and in the post-season. Ray was actually somewhat of a choker.

I don't think either deserve this spot though but with the Ray vs. Reggie comparison going in this thread, I just wanted to drop my 2 cents on the comparison.

Think of Reggie like this....... A Ray Allen with MUCH better clutch ability who would trashtalk, get under the skin of the likes Lebron and Kobe all the time, that would break them down mentally, cause them to throw a punch, cause them to do something they dont want, cause them to even choke.... next thing you know Ray Allen hits some clutch shots, wins the game and shows you the "choke sign" and says: "Nice triple double...." ...... Ray Allen would all of the sudden be the #1 player in their nightmares & thoughts, a big motivation for Lebron & Kobe to play basketball, they would be just counting the days to play him again with anger... and a bit of fear... "and he only averages 20 ppg..."..

Ray and Reggie are similar in the way they shoot/play (for at least 3 quarters and regular season) as SGs, but they are different imo, the intangibles/killer instinct/mind Reggie possessed make them two COMPLETELY different players.... and something which in my opinion makes Reggie better than Ray Allen.... its popular to say Ray Allen was a better ballhandler, passer but that there is nowhere close in significant difference, i mean not something that made him impact the game better than what Reggies intangibles/killer instinct/mind did.....

You very young folks see Reggie Miller on TV today and see how good of a guy he is... but on the court he was a completely different animal in every god damn way... he was the nastiest, dirtiest, "trashtalkiest", VILLAIN and he cherished it, he infact openly verbally asked for it... he didnt laugh, he was not friendly, he only wanted to cut your liver out... and then talk about it... the more hate, the more drama, the better he would play... and the worse you would feel (and play).... ice cold is an understatement.... if Reggie recieved the hate like lets say Lebron did in 2010-11 he would have won MVP/FMVP/Championship and everything.. :D

[Patrick Chewing]

Wow that list is a joke

[G.O.A.T]

Wow that list is a joke

In Which ways?

I find a lot of rankings bizarre, but overall, this is a pretty good top 25 and a very solid top fifty in my opinion. Certainly not exactly how I'd rank them, but I change my own rankings multiple times a year so it's heard to be overly critical.

Anyway, just wondering which parts of the list you found most off base?

[L.Kizzle]

None of them are better than Pierce but of the three Worthy has the best argument.

I'm not sure who I would vote for at #50. I'm undecided between Dwight Howard, Pau Gasol, Chris Paul, and James Worthy.

lol at Rodman being voted above those guys.
I thought Pierce in the 50 was bad, but Gasol should be no where near 100.

:biggums:

[Deuce Bigalow]

None of them are better than Pierce but of the three Worthy has the best argument.

I'm not sure who I would vote for at #50. I'm undecided between Dwight Howard, Pau Gasol, Chris Paul, and James Worthy.

lol at Rodman being voted above those guys.
Pau Gasol in consideration for #50 all-time? lol RG

[G.O.A.T]

I thought Pierce in the 50 was bad, but Gasol should be no where near 100.

:biggums:

I think the case for Gasol in the top 100 is pretty strong. Think about it. All-NBa at his peak, 2nd best player on two title teams, lead a team to the players as best player, he's basically a poor mans McHale or Worthy in terms of his ability to compliment a great player on a fairly balanced championship contending team.

[dyna]

Dennis Rodman

[L.Kizzle]

I think the case for Gasol in the top 100 is pretty strong. Think about it. All-NBa at his peak, 2nd best player on two title teams, lead a team to the players as best player, he's basically a poor mans McHale or Worthy in terms of his ability to compliment a great player on a fairly balanced championship contending team.
If he is top 100, he's near he very end. I wouldn't put him over guys like Gus Johnson, Marques Johnson, David Thompson, Ed Macauley, Chauncey Billups, ect.

[G.O.A.T]

If he is top 100, he's near he very end. I wouldn't put him over guys like Gus Johnson, Marques Johnson, David Thompson, Ed Macauley, Chauncey Billups, ect.


What puts Billups above him? Or Macauley especially?

I struggle with Gus Johnson. I know how good he could have been, but he never got to really realize that.

I do agree though that he belongs in the last bit of the top 100.

[97 bulls]

This is just a simple question...

To you people who pick Dennis Rodman here, if you had to pick between Reggie Miller and Dennis Rodman, who would it be?

Be honest now...

I know what my answer would be, all due respect to Dennis Rodman, he also belongs here somewhere in the standings... but not ahead of Reggie in my list... no god damn way.... Rodman was not a go-to-guy, he was not a franchise player that would impact you in a way you could win unless that team already had that go-to-guy / franchise player, he was only a complimentary player TO TOP 50 PEOPLE LIKE REGGIE MILLER........

Are you really gona act like rings is what separates Rodman over Reggie? Just because he was blessed of having to play with what i consider is the greatest team ever? Switch teams where Reggie Miller would play next to Jordan for the Bulls and Rodman would play next to Pooh Richardson (who? exactly) for the Pacers and i can guarantee you he would have the same championships.... and i can guarantee you Rodman would be remembered as nothing but a rebounding showman.... Rings are overrated that way...
Its not this simple. Guess what? If you got a Reggie Miller on your team, you're gonna need a Dennis Rodman. That is if your interested in winning. We saw how important Rodman was to the Bulls.

All Miller could do is shoot. Is he clutch? Absolutely. Would I pick him over Rodman to take the last shot? Off course. Heres the difference. If youd take Miller to take the last shot in a game, id gladly take Rodman to stop him.

[pauk]

Its not this simple. Guess what? If you got a Reggie Miller on your team, you're gonna need a Dennis Rodman. That is if your interested in winning. We saw how important Rodman was to the Bulls.

All Miller could do is shoot. Is he clutch? Absolutely. Would I pick him over Rodman to take the last shot? Off course. Heres the difference. If youd take Miller to take the last shot in a game, id gladly take Rodman to stop him.

1 on 1? He could do something.... But nobody and i mean NOBODY could guard Reggie Miller in a team game, he was a like marathon runner, that worked without the ball and had a ridicilous bag of tricks to get "open" (he needed only an inch of space to release and the release is lightning)... Like Jordan said once: "You dont defend Reggie, you chase him".... while chasing him you will be only exhausting yourself while also trying to avoid walls of the likes of Dale Davis... and remember you cant touch him, Reggie could win Oscar every year how good of a flopper he was... and the result of that is 90% on the FT line.... Rodman would be the last guy on the list to "defend" Reggie... he would be to exhausted and bruised to rebound later (or simply just fouled out) :D

Thats kindof what Kobe meant aswell when he said why he thinks Reggie was the toughest guy he ever had to defend: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mKCxkJTFrU

[MiamiThrice]

Pau Gasol
http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.179239!/img/httpImage/image.jpg

-2x NBA Champion (2009, 2010)
-Led 2010 Lakers to the championship as the best player
-4 x NBA Allstar
-18.7 PPG, 9.2 RPG 3.2 APG career numbers
-3 All NBA teams
-Two silver medals as the best player
-One of the most skilled bigmen of all-time
-Made the cover of the NBA video game in Spain

[StateOfMind12]

I thought Pierce in the 50 was bad, but Gasol should be no where near 100.:
U mad? Pierce, top 50 player of all-time, I told you but at least you weren't one of those a-holes that purposely changed their vote to Rodman to prevent Pierce from making it so props. But lol at Gasol not being top 100.

[97 bulls]

new smartphones from verizon But nobody and i mean NOBODY could guard Reggie Miller in a team game, he was a like marathon runner, that worked without the ball and had a ridicilous bag of tricks to get "open" (he needed only an inch of space to release and the release is lightning)... Like Jordan said once: "You dont defend Reggie, you chase him".... while chasing him you will be only exhausting yourself while also trying to avoid walls of the likes of Dale Davis... and remember you cant touch him, Reggie could win Oscar every year how good of a flopper he was... and the result of that is 90% on the FT line.... Rodman would be the last guy on the list to "defend" Reggie... he would be to exhausted and bruised to rebound later (or simply just fouled out) :D

Thats kindof what Kobe meant aswell when he said why he thinks Reggie was the toughest guy he ever had to defend: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mKCxkJTFrU[/QUOTE]
Exhausted? The same Dennis Rodman that would ride a stationary bike while he was resting? The same Dennis Rodman that would out rebound and out hustle guys much biggdr than him? The same Dennis Rodman that Phil Jackson called the greatest athlete hes ever seen?

[Deuce Bigalow]

Pau Gasol
http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.179239!/img/httpImage/image.jpg

-2x NBA Champion (2009, 2010)
-4 x NBA Allstar
-18.7 PPG, 9.2 RPG 3.2 APG career numbers
-3 All NBA teams
-Two silver medals as the best player
-One of the most skilled bigmen of all-time
-Made the cover of the NBA video game in Spain
fixed

[BoutPractice]

Dwight Howard.
He's been the dominant center in the league for half a decade, and hasn't even reached his peak yet. He has carried his team on his shoulders for years, leading them as far as the Finals.

While he hasn't had to face the same kind of competition as other great centers from the past, and while he hasn't had the same dominant offensive stats either... his defense is legendary in any era, and his ability to consistently perform as a first offensive option in the guard-oriented 21st century - the mere fact that he is trusted to play that role for his team when 90% of centers nowadays, even the good ones, are asked to play Joakim Noah - extremely impressive.

A 3 time DPOY, he is along with Kevin Durant one of the most likely players to collect MVPs (he's probably the frontrunner for this year) and titles in years to come. Even if he doesn't reach those heights, he is almost certainly going up in those all-time lists, whereas Thurmond's career is done.

[MasterDurant24]

Nate Thurmond.

[nycelt84]

Nate Thurmond

[Duncan21formvp]

Worthy

[Kblaze8855]

Reggies own coach ranked him behind Derrick Mckey....and Mckey wont be top 200.

And if its about who is actually the best Kevin Durant and Dwight slaughter Reggie And having already accomplished more than he did and being ranked much higher in their time there is no reason for his name to even be mentioned.

There are people who wont make top 100 Reggie doesnt really compare to.



But nobody and i mean NOBODY could guard Reggie Miller in a team game

Reggies inability to create his own shot on a regular basis is all you needed to defend him. dude wasnt scoring like 15-22 points most of his career or going 1-16 in the biggest game of his life because he was unguardable. Reggie did not create many good looks. his big games are when he just makes bad looks because hes hot. But he would straight vanish during big games and small for long stretches because there was little he could do to impose his will that wasnt just playing bad basketball and hoping for a good result.

[G.O.A.T]

Reggies own coach ranked him behind Derrick Mckey....and Mckey wont be top 200.

Because someone said something, one time, before Reggie hit his prime, does not mean it completely defines Miller's role on those teams relative to McKey's.

None of the players who played with McKey rank him as a top ten win or small forward of all-time as many do with Miller at the shooting guard position.

I understand your point now as I did when first you mentioned it, but having seen those years first hand, one passing comment is not enough to dissuade me from what I believe I saw.


Reggies inability to create his own shot on a regular basis is all you needed to defend him.

Well that and a defender with incredible stamina, focus and discipline. And big's who could show on the screens without over committing and leaving a Davis open for a dunk or Smits for a 12 footer. And despite his inability to create his own shot he hit more clutch shots than most stars of his day and built a reputation that exceeds that of many players higher when it comes to the biggest moments.



dude wasnt scoring like 15-22 points most of his career or going 1-16 in the biggest game of his life because he was unguardable.

Reggie did not create many good looks. his big games are when he just makes bad looks because hes hot. But he would straight vanish during big games and small for long stretches because there was little he could do to impose his will that wasnt just playing bad basketball and hoping for a good result.

Just because he isn't shooting doesn't mean he isn't effective. Miller understood this. So did his teammates. And even coach Brown


"Reggie's movement creates more looks for our bigs than any play we run for them. There isn't a player in this league who can keep with Reggie for four quarters. He's very unselfish in that he doesn't force the issue as often as most guys would in his place"

EDIT: Not sure if that was Brown or Bird actually, just have the quote attributed to LB, guessing it's Pound for pound though.

This one is Brown, in 1994 after the Pacers beat the Hawks to reach the ECF, reflecting on his philosophy before he came to the Pacers:


"I knew it would all have to start with Reggie," Brown had said. Brown had told Miller that he would get on him in practice, and in games. "Every player can get better," said Brown. "My job is to make you -- and the team -- better." Miller understood. "If he could get on me, and help make me a more complete player, the other guys knew that it was O.K. for him to get on them," said Miller. Coach Stresses Team Defense

Here's some stuff from the 1995 playoffs after Indiana eliminated the Knicks behind 28 from Reggie.

"We knew that they would fly to Reggie late in the game, because they didn't want him to beat them," said Pacers forward Derrick McKey

"They were really concentrating on Reggie, so it allowed me to get a little more room," Center Rik Smits said.

"After Reggie's big third quarter the Knicks were forced to pay more attention to him and it really open up our offense." Mark Jackson noted.

[Kblaze8855]

It was not one time. And I assure you...if we go into Larry Brown quotes on reggie miller he wont come out looking good. Especially considering how much more likely a coach is to offer praise of his own players in public than to say what he really feels if its negative. Really:



In Indiana, coach Larry Brown, the eternal pessimist, blames his team's lack of a leader for the Pacers' unexpected stay around mediocrity. "Reggie (Miller) is not a leader, not at all," Brown says.


nd Indiana's defense starts with Derrick McKey.

"He's as good a defender as there is in the league," coach Larry Brown said. "He's a great all-around player. I don't know where we'd be without him."

"He's the best. He defends every night. He does whatever we need him to do to win," Brown said.

While Brown and teammates call McKey the most important player on the team, McKey was characteristically modest about his play following the win over Charlotte.


Washington Post - Dec 20, 1995
Coach Larry Brown, who has referred to McKey as "our best player," said he was " thrilled to death."

And it wasnt just Larry:



In fact, Bulls coach Phil Jackson voted for McKey for the All-Star team, saying: "He's their best player. He's the reason they are where they are."

At the time...Larry Brown...a basketball lifer and obsessive lover of the game and HOF coach of the Pacers...ranks Mckey over Reggie. Phil Jackson...HOF coach of a division rival who has been playing Reggie over for years...rans Mckey over reggie. national media names 4 people not in this top 50 to the All NBA team over reggie. Millions of fans do not vote him into the ASG....and the NBA coaches see fit to name Kenny Anderson and Mookie Blaylock to the team on the bench and not Reggie.

But here we are 18 years later and people who barely remember it or dont...have Reggie top 50 all time and guys over him probably not top 100. doesnt...strike anyone as odd? That these esteemed basketball people didnt think highly of Reggie but 20 years later people who dont remember it would say Reggie was better at the time...and we act like the people NOW know better about the past than NBA coaches did in their present?

And before Reggie hit his prime?

That idea really annoys me at times. Reggie Miller was older than Kevin Durant is now in 1990. But people act like he didnt come into his own till he was 30.

Reggie Miller was as good as he ever was in 1989. I watched him back then. He didnt get much better at anything but passing and his athletic ability fell off unusually early and his faceup game back then got him more than his post up game did in the late 90s.

Anyway....as I said. Little to justify even discussing Reggie at the moment and all its gonna do is get 22 year olds who dont remember the real Reggie to vote for him out of name value just like other 90s/early 2000s players.

I dont have to tell you what Dennis Johnson, Billy Cunningham, Paul Westphal, Jojo white, Sidney Moncrief, Tiny Archibald, Earl Monroe and so on did. But a lot of people who dont know...will see Reggie Miller discussion...and vote for him over them. Not because of looking into them and deciding hes better or did more(laughable for at least 4 of them).

But because Reggie Miller played when they were kids and they know more about him.

Hes gonna start getting votes from people who dont know the others soon and while there is nothing to be done about it...I dont need to have some long argument thats just gonna get his name mentioned 70 times and have more deserving/accomplished/talented players disregarded because this is 2012 and nobody cares about Dennis Johnson anymore.

[BIZARRO]

James Worthy.

"James Worthy was one of the top 10 -- top five -- players in playoff history" - Magic Johnson

Three Words. Big. Game. James.

Definitely should be the next selection. :bowdown:

[G.O.A.T]

That idea really annoys me at times. Reggie Miller was older than Kevin Durant is now in 1990. But people act like he didnt come into his own till he was 30.

Fair enough. He was in his prime, but he hadn't accomplished the things that define his career yet. Almost all of his best playoff games came after those 1995 quotes.




Reggie Miller was as good as he ever was in 1989. I watched him back then. He didnt get much better at anything but passing and his athletic ability fell off unusually early and his faceup game back then got him more than his post up game did in the late 90s.

And defense of course. As Brown would often note, Miller was underrated as defender.


Anyway....as I said. Little to justify even discussing Reggie at the moment and all its gonna do is get 22 year olds who dont remember the real Reggie to vote for him out of name value just like other 90s/early 2000s players.

I dont have to tell you what Dennis Johnson, Billy Cunningham, Paul Westphal, Jojo white, Sidney Moncrief, Tiny Archibald, Earl Monroe and so on did. But a lot of people who dont know...will see Reggie Miller discussion...and vote for him over them. Not because of looking into them and deciding hes better or did more(laughable for at least 4 of them).

But because Reggie Miller played when they were kids and they know more about him.

Sure but who cares. Don't distort what Miller was or focus on the bad. He was brilliant in clutch games far more often than not. As far as the quotes go, Brown either believed both guys were his best players and leaders (since we have quotes confirming that stance him) or he was just speaking in the moment.

I know you don't believe that Derrick McKey was the Pacers best player or that Brown or Jackson ever believed that. You understand that coach say those things for various reasons. To motivate a player, to challenge a player, to build up an underrated or under-appreciated player, to distract from another issue etc.


Hes gonna start getting votes from people who dont know the others soon and while there is nothing to be done about it...I dont need to have some long argument thats just gonna get his name mentioned 70 times and have more deserving/accomplished/talented players disregarded because this is 2012 and nobody cares about Dennis Johnson anymore.

Earlier you mentioned Miller shooting 1-16 in "the biggest game of his life" or something to that effect. That was the Lakers game, game one of the Finals correct?

When you mention Dennis Johnson, its worth noting that he out-baded (not sure why I made a word up there) Miller and even John Starks when it comes to Finals failures going 0-14 in game seven of the '78 Finals.

[JMT]

Nate Thurmond

[dunksby]

Ray Allen.

[kurple]

Which players in the ISH Top 50 would you place him above??
Pierce

cant believe RG brainwashed ISH to pick Pierce ahead of him

[kurple]

Rodman

[blablabla]

James Worthy

[Kblaze8855]

Larry Brown loves defense and Phil Jackson respects all around players. I have no reason to think they didnt think Mckey was better than Reggie. Larry especially. Hes a pretty straight talker.

And sure Dennis had shitty shooting games. But he wasnt a scorer. he was a brilliant all around basketball player who could score. And Dennis was a second year player who had yet to even be an all star. Not exactly the same as acting like Reggie wasnt in his prime at 28. He put up 13ppg that year. But the very next season he put up 21/6/4 2 steals and 2 blocks a game in the playoffs in winning it all...as finals MVP...having 30+ and 10 finals games with 4 blocks...one of which was on an attempted game winner. And it wasnt even the only game winning defensive play he made in a finals. And then theres:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9KotZZMki7E


And he had 27/12/7 that game.

And the next game he had 22/17.

Wasnt great last game but he did his part. Im not sure I wouldnt vote Dennis around this point. Something I had on him a while back:





Dennis Johnson was an all NBA first teamer, like a 6 time all star, had about 8 deep playoff runs, won a finals MVP, won 3 rings, made 9 all D teams, stepped up in the playoffs pretty much yearly, was unselfish, well rounded and could and did play and defend 3 positions, and he made several major plays in the finals including:

Blocked an attempted game winner in 79 in a game he had 32/10.
Got a steal and hit the resulting FTs vs the Lakers end of game game 7 in 84
Made the game winner in game 4 in the 85 finals.
Had 22/14 in game 4 of the 84 finals and hit the FTs to seal the game


In the 87 playoffs he averaged 19/9 after 13/8 in the regular season and in the finals:

7 points and 13 assists
20/9/4
26/7/4
15 points and 14 assists
25/11
33/10/5

And his career was winding down.

In the 86 finals

19/11/8
18/7/4
20/7/4
21/4/4
13/5/4
10/5/5/3 steals(they were up by 30 in the 4th)

17/6/5 in the finals in total.


Dennis Johnson was one of the best players in the league, then one of the best role players ever, and he doesnt even get mentioned that often when discussing those celtics. They had a godly frontcourt but he pulled more than his own weight.

DJ was both a superstar and the ultimate role player and didnt know how to lose(the Suns won 57, 46, and 53 with him...and the Sonics won the title...so you cant claim the celtics made him a winner).

If he didnt pass away he wouldnt even be in the HOF having waited 20 years.

Id feel less dirty about it than I would with some of these guys going in over the Durants, Pauls, and Dwights. At least he was arguably the best on a champion(with respect to Gus and Sikma), was an all nba first teamer, and got up to 5th in MVP voting.

There are guys already in who can say none of those.

[StateOfMind12]

Reggies inability to create his own shot on a regular basis is all you needed to defend him.
It's pretty impressive that a guy who can't create his own shot on a regular basis was still capable of averaging 25-30 ppg in the post-season. I think that just makes him even more valuable since he doesn't disrupt the flow of the offense and he was super efficient at getting his points.


dude wasnt scoring like 15-22 points most of his career or going 1-16 in the biggest game of his life because he was unguardable.
Ray went 0/13 and 3/14 in the biggest games of his life. How is that much better? Anyone can cherry pick games.

Like I said, Ray could do more than Reggie could, no one should deny this.

However, Ray was not necessarily more productive nor was he some all-around beast like Lebron James.

Ray was a better rebounder, passer, and defender than Reggie was but that doesn't necessarily mean Ray was actually good in this area, it just means he was better than Reggie at it. They are not correlated.

[Owl]

Regarding Reggie in general I'd say we're not quite in his range yet (ironic because of course Reggie had area code type range).

He was a very high accuracy, moderately high usage shooter who didn't create as many of his shots as teams number one options usually do. Combining usage with efficiency is valuable and perhaps ignored by some. He played well for a long time. Still he was nothing special in the other areas of his game.


It was not one time. And I assure you...if we go into Larry Brown quotes on reggie miller he wont come out looking good. Especially considering how much more likely a coach is to offer praise of his own players in public than to say what he really feels if its negative.
"A coach" yes, Larry Brown, no.

Brown was notorious for never being satisfied with his rosters (and agitating his GMs to make trades). And I think he criticised his stars, he certainly did with AI and I think there were occasional backhanded shots at Robinson, though he seems to speak highly of the Admiral nowadays.

If the McKey based point is Reggie wasn't as far above his teammates as people believe in retrospect (related arguments on the idea of Reggie being larger than our memories than he was considered at the time being: only 3 time 3rd team All-NBA, 5 time all-star and only twice got MVP votes neither time being close to a genuine candidate) then that might be fair. If it's that Derrick McKey had a career that is remotely comparable in value to that of Reggie Miller, I don't think you'll find too many people willing to buy what you're peddling.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Didn't look like Reggie had trouble creating his shot here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zWXkwv0am8

[Kblaze8855]

I didnt say Mckey was greater than Reggie or should be ranked higher. I said multiple HOf coaches said he was better than Reggie in his prime. Take it up with them.

Far as the game above...I dont feel a need to write most of this out again so:



He came into the casual fans attention for losing to the Knicks in dramatic fashion(his usual way of standing out...lose in dramatic fashion).

But nobody just ranked him as some great player. He wasnt some all NBA type year to year. Not even third team. Behind Eddie Jones, Terrell Brandon, Spre, and many others people act like hes better than in retrospect.

But its as if none of that happened. I watched the best Reggie there was. And it wasnt mid/late 90s pick your spots 1-2 big shots and lose Reggie. I remember when Reggie had a little athletic ability and might do his shitty little 2 hand dunk in traffic here and there. When he didnt just come off screens. When he got it one on one and made a quick move. Pullup jumper off the dribble reggie. Post you up fake one way fade the other, shoot 5 posessions in a row Reggie, "You will respect me..." Reggie talking shit.

But that Reggie turned into play my part Reggie and while he wasnt really shooting less he sure as hell wasnt the same focus off the offense. He had theb all maybe half as much and got plenty of plays run for him....that didnt end up in touches because he didnt get it when he wasnt open anymore.

And I dont know if its by chance or what but....when Reggie stopped being the focal point the Pacers started winning.


I saw more of young Reggie than I believe most here did...and I have seen that game. I had the entire game when I made a reggie miller video years ago.

Not being good at creating your own shot doesnt mean a borderline all star cant have big games. We really need to run down the list of guys who arent particularly good at creating good looks who had big nights?

Jason Richardson dropped like 50 a few years ago and he cant do the same move twice.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

I'm not on either side really. I just don't think he had trouble creating his shot "consistently". Less consistently than say guys like MJ and Mitch? Ya, sure..but still a VERY cerebral scorer.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFMNWOP-VKo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ms9J2etJbDQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9X0KzuMeyM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7g0iEOPwj9k

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDBXcFVo2dU

Playoff seasons of 27ppg on 58% shooting and 64% from 3PT; 32ppg on 53% shooting and 53% 3PT; 26ppg on 48% shooting and 42% from 3PT; 24ppg on 45% shooting and 40% from 3PT; 31ppg on 46% shooting and 43% from 3PT; 24ppg on 50% shooting on 41% from 3PT.

Like another poster said..for someone that couldn't get his own shot "consistently", when it counted most, he sure had many scoring tears.

[Kblaze8855]

No he didnt. And putting the word "seasons" in bold doesnt mean it wasnt actually a 3 game series sweep. He averaged 25ppg on one playoff run that wasnt a first round loss. One. One time in 18 years did he put up 25ppg in the playoffs...when it wasnt a first round loss where the small number of games makes for high averages.

Alex English had 3 multiple series playoff runs over 25ppg and nobody gives a shit. Probably because it isnt that impressive for HOF guys who arent expected to do anything but score.

Its only worth mentioning for guys not much is really expected of. When Ben Gordon has 25ppg individual series(and he has) its noteworthy. When a guy in discussion for top 50 all time does it?

Its just trivia.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

But he did, unless you live in a fantasy land. Whether or not it was in a single-series was never my argument; he put up GREAT scoring numbers...in the playoffs.

[Kblaze8855]

If you find it "GREAT" when a guy who is expected to do nothing else scores 27ppg over 3 losses...fine. I cant tell you what the word great means. But I can tell you Michael Redd has done it in the playoffs over 5 games and shot 52% overall and 47% from 3 in doing it. And if he did it 5 times he doesnt stop being Michael Redd.

My great does not seem to be your great. Which is....great. Your right to be impressed by less than I am in regards to players on this level.

Me? I dont care any more about Reggies 27 a game while being swept than Dengs 26 a game on 58% shooting while sweeping the defending champs.

Its just...whatever. 3-5 games of whatever. Dana Barros could drop 30 over 3 games playoffs or otherwise.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

If you find it "GREAT" when a guy who is expected to do nothing else scores 27ppg over 3 losses...fine.

:wtf:

But that was what we were debating. Scoring. The ability to create your own shot.



But I can tell you Michael Redd has done it in the playoffs over 5 games

Except, Reggie did it more than half of his playoff career. You're comparing what Michael Redd did in one series to Reggie's, what, 9 playoff seasons? Again, wtf?

[Kblaze8855]

And his PPG over 3 games does what?

You think I watched the 90s and 2000s and didnt think Reggie could score 27 over 3 games?

He could have done that in like 2004.

[Kblaze8855]

In fact...having checked...he had 28 and 33 in back to back games in 2005...in the playoffs...it was even vs the Celtics like the 27ppg series years earlier. He only had 12 and 7 points before and after those games...but he was still capable of it. he had 39 vs the Lakers in his final season.

These are not terribly difficult things to do for a HOF player who is a scorer and nothing else.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

And his PPG over 3 games does what?

You think I watched the 90s and 2000s and didnt think Reggie could score 27 over 3 games?

He could have done that in like 2004.

Not all of those series were 3 games. Some a 7 game series, another run with a 10-14 game sample size.

What I would like to know is how one, who supposedly doesn't have the ability to create his shot "consistently"..can average sub ~25ppg on great efficiency against playoff defenses. How does that work?

[Kblaze8855]

You have watched the game before im sure.

There are players who arent great creating their own shot who scored 15-20 thousand points. I suspect Shawn Marion is around there. Hes had better scoring seasons than guys like Isiah Rider who were murderers one on one.

You dont need it explained how that happens. You didnt just start watching the game.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

You have watched the game before im sure.

There are players who arent great creating their own shot who scored 15-20 thousand points. I suspect Shawn Marion is around there. Hes had better scoring seasons than guys like Isiah Rider who were murderers one on one.

You dont need it explained how that happens. You didnt just start watching the game.

Again though, this is several playoff seasons (and no, not just singular-series w/ a 3 game sample size). There's no way someone who had difficulty creating their shot on a consistent-basis could do what he did MULTIPLE playoff runs.

[Kblaze8855]

As I said...1 time in 18 or 19 years did he score 25ppg in the playoffs and not have it be a first round loss. Be it 3 games 5 or 6 or whatever. And yes...people who cant get their own shot on a high level can still score points. Not being able to make your own shot is relative. I suspect when I say it I mean the same thing Larry Brown meant when he said this:



"I know people are going to say Reggie didn't do this or that, but I've always said it's a team thing for him," said Brown. "He has trouble getting his own shot, beating people off the dribble. He's not what people make him out to be."


It doesnt mean hes Tyrus thomas(though ive seen him create his own shot as well). It means relative to what hes considered....he isnt a great shot producer.

Now.....ive been challenged on madden and kids are telling me a stinkbug has been sighted in the next room and I...have to look into that. enjoy your day.

[Boston C's]

I suggest you take a look at his playoff performances especially as a Celtic from 2008-2010.

2008 - Ray Allen was playing like hot garbage until the NBA finals. In the ECSF vs. the Cavs, Ray scored less than 10 ppg and wasn't even the 3rd leading scorer on the team, KG, Pierce, and even Rondo averaged more ppg than Ray did in that series.

The only reason why that series went to 7 games was because of how bad Ray played. If he played better than that, that series would have went to 5 games max. It shouldn't have went to 7 games but it did due to how poorly Ray played.

Ray vs. 2008 Cavs in ECSF- 9.3 ppg, 32.8% FG, 16.7% 3P.

2009 - Ray Allen plays like hot garbage against the Orlando Magic. This was the series where JJ Redick made a name for himself. In the past, people considered Redick a bust, a joke, and practically the Adam Morrison of the league. JJ Reddick literally shut down Ray in that series.

Ray vs. 2009 Magic in ECSF - 13.1 ppg, 34.4% FG, 19% from 3.

2010 - Ray Allen flames out in the Finals. He had a historic performance in Game 2 of the Finals but was invisible for the rest of the series. He shot 0/13 in Game 3 and 3/14 in Game 7.

Ray vs. 2010 Lakers in NBA Finals - 14.6 ppg, 36.7% FG, 29.3% from 3.


The choking label is warranted for Ray.

no its not...ray from the ecf finals to the nba finals stepped up when the celtics needed him too...if he played like trash like in the first 2 rounds we wouldnt even be talking about tryin to get banner 18...i suggest you go look at his seattle days and bucks days...dude played twice as good in the playoffs...if you wanna nitpick series or games pierce was pretty average until that game 7 of the cavs that yr and in 09 didn't play well against orlando at all really...if ray didnt go bolistic in the first round against chicago we wouldnt even had made it to round two...and when game 7 against orlando rolled around ray allen was the only one who stepped up to play and that includes pierce because he was pretty bad in that deciding game...lets not also forget game 6 at home this yr...pierce was God awful...but I don't consider him a choker... a choker is someone who consistently fails int he playoffs so you should check rays resume again before you say that because he has had some big time games when his team needed him too especially in his prime...the 45 against the kings in 05 and the 41 against the sixers in game 6 are a couple that come to mind when his team desperately needed a win

[Boston C's]

It's pretty impressive that a guy who can't create his own shot on a regular basis was still capable of averaging 25-30 ppg in the post-season. I think that just makes him even more valuable since he doesn't disrupt the flow of the offense and he was super efficient at getting his points.


Ray went 0/13 and 3/14 in the biggest games of his life. How is that much better? Anyone can cherry pick games.

Like I said, Ray could do more than Reggie could, no one should deny this.

However, Ray was not necessarily more productive nor was he some all-around beast like Lebron James.

Ray was a better rebounder, passer, and defender than Reggie was but that doesn't necessarily mean Ray was actually good in this area, it just means he was better than Reggie at it. They are not correlated.

how is being able to average 5 assists and 5 boards not good in that area...i wonder what you constitute as good for that?

ray was a far superior player to reggie period

[colts19]

Reggie Miller

[L.Kizzle]

U mad? Pierce, top 50 player of all-time, I told you but at least you weren't one of those a-holes that purposely changed their vote to Rodman to prevent Pierce from making it so props. But lol at Gasol not being top 100.
Pierce is closer to the late 50s than the late 40s for me, not much of a diference really. And Pau is not top 50, epecially over guys like Worthy, Thurmond ect who are gettin votes n9ow.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Results

6- Dennis Rodman
5- James Worthy
4- Nate Thurmond
2- Reggie Miller
2- Ray Allen
2- Dwight Howard
1- Chris Paul
1- Hal Greer
1- Pau Gasol

[StateOfMind12]

how is being able to average 5 assists and 5 boards not good in that area...i wonder what you constitute as good for that?

ray was a far superior player to reggie period
Ray never averaged 5 assists and 5 boards, maybe 4/4 or 3/3 but never 5/5.


no its not...ray from the ecf finals to the nba finals stepped up when the celtics needed him too...if he played like trash like in the first 2 rounds we wouldnt even be talking about tryin to get banner 18
If Ray didn't play like trash in the first 2 rounds then the Celtics wouldn't have taken them 7 games each to beat two pretenders.

Ray has never been that clutch and certainly not clutch compared to Reggie. Ray is the most overrated clutch player of all-time with Bird and Kobe close by.

[Boston C's]

Ray never averaged 5 assists and 5 boards, maybe 4/4 or 3/3 but never 5/5.


If Ray didn't play like trash in the first 2 rounds then the Celtics wouldn't have taken them 7 games each to beat two pretenders.

Ray has never been that clutch and certainly not clutch compared to Reggie. Ray is the most overrated clutch player of all-time with Bird and Kobe close by.

2003-2004 ray averaged 23-5-5 while playing the point for seattle the whole season...I'd like to see reggie play point for a few games let alone for a whole season lol

you wanna go look at clutch go compare ray and pp's clutch stats when the game is on the line its not even close really...and don't think for a second i dont think pierce is clutch as hell because hes a cold blooded dude i won't dismiss his accomplishments because even though i don't feel hes a top 50 player he is more deserving then ray or reggie but I really don't see the case for reggie above ray I don't...ray if anything is underrated in the clutch because NOBODY talks about him ever...dude was cold blooded as they come...not more clutch then reggie but ray is up there in clutchness compared to the all time greats

so basically what I'm saying is your second statement is absolutely asinine and if you don't believe me ask paul pierce and k.g yourself

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_b6KhDJJEME

[StateOfMind12]

2003-2004 ray averaged 23-5-5 while playing the point for seattle the whole season...I'd like to see reggie play point for a few games let alone for a whole season lol
He didn't average 5-5, he averaged 5.1 and 4.8, and that isn't 5-5.

We would be saying that Magic Johnson averaged a triple double in 1982 since he averaged 9.5 apg and 9.6 rpg if we just rounded up. .


you wanna go look at clutch go compare ray and pp's clutch stats when the game is on the line its not even close really
I would rather compare how they do in the post-season and Pierce is much better than Ray in those moments. He always has been and he always will be because Pierce was always a better player.



I really don't see the case for reggie above ray I don't...ray if anything is underrated in the clutch because NOBODY talks about him ever...dude was cold blooded as they come...not more clutch then reggie but ray is up there in clutchness compared to the all time greats
I think Ray peaked higher due to having more abilities and being able to do more but I'm not sure if he was better career wise or all-time wise because Miller was pretty much the Karl Malone of SGs.

[Boston C's]

He didn't average 5-5, he averaged 5.1 and 4.8, and that isn't 5-5.

We would be saying that Magic Johnson averaged a triple double in 1982 since he averaged 9.5 apg and 9.6 rpg if we just rounded up. .


I would rather compare how they do in the post-season and Pierce is much better than Ray in those moments. He always has been and he always will be because Pierce was always a better player.



I think Ray peaked higher due to having more abilities and being able to do more but I'm not sure if he was better career wise or all-time wise because Miller was pretty much the Karl Malone of SGs.

First point taken

Second point...that wasn't always the case... in 05 not only did ray perform better in the regular season then pierce he also did in the 05 playoffs and that is when they were both in their prime...so I'll tell you in 05 ray was definitely better then pierce '

Third point makes absolutely no sense...go look at their careers and compare resumes...twice as many all star appearances ray was an all nba second teamer while scoring rebounding and assisting more and better then reggie did all while playing in the golden era of swingmen...reggie failed to make all star teams against player not even close to the caliber of what ray faced...ray literally has accomplished more then reggie in his career and the one trump card reggie had (his 3 point record) ray took that from him as well so no there is literally nothing in his career that reggie did that was better then ray no accomplishments no stats literally nothing

[StateOfMind12]

Second point...that wasn't always the case... in 05 not only did ray perform better in the regular season then pierce he also did in the 05 playoffs and that is when they were both in their prime...so I'll tell you in 05 ray was definitely better then pierce '
No he didn't. Pierce was great in the 2005 playoffs, he didn't win a playoff series like Ray did but Pierce still played well.

23/8/5 with 51% FG, 65% TS if you want me to round up.

Not to mention, Pierce went up against a better defense. Pierce went up against the Pacers, Ray got to go up against the Kings. Ray didn't play that well against the Spurs, probably because they were actually a defensive team.


Third point makes absolutely no sense...go look at their careers and compare resumes...twice as many all star appearances ray was an all nba second teamer while scoring rebounding and assisting more and better then reggie did all while playing in the golden era of swingmen...reggie failed to make all star teams against player not even close to the caliber of what ray faced...ray literally has accomplished more then reggie in his career and the one trump card reggie had (his 3 point record) ray took that from him as well so no there is literally nothing in his career that reggie did that was better then ray no accomplishments no stats literally nothing
Reggie came out to play in the post-season and he was far better than Ray was when those times came. Ray was a better regular season player, no doubt, but post-season is more important.

[Owl]

I think Ray peaked higher due to having more abilities and being able to do more but I'm not sure if he was better career wise or all-time wise because Miller was pretty much the Karl Malone of SGs.
I know what you're getting at here (longevity) but you might want to throw a caveat in there so it's clear that you're not thinking that Miller was ever at Malone's level. And whilst he remained productive for longer than most, looking at it, he didn't really age as well as Malone either, though there's hardly any shame in that (Ken Berger did a list of the NBA seasons by over 35 year olds, Malone appears 3 times, as does Jabbar and there's one appearance each from Wilt, Alex English, Elgin Baylor and MJ). To be fair it's harder for wing to age gracefully than any other position (many bigs can still get by on their size and a few of the better pgs remain useful through passing, decision making and leadership).

[Boston C's]

No he didn't. Pierce was great in the 2005 playoffs, he didn't win a playoff series like Ray did but Pierce still played well.

23/8/5 with 51% FG, 65% TS if you want me to round up.

Not to mention, Pierce went up against a better defense. Pierce went up against the Pacers, Ray got to go up against the Kings. Ray didn't play that well against the Spurs, probably because they were actually a defensive team.


Reggie came out to play in the post-season and he was far better than Ray was when those times came. Ray was a better regular season player, no doubt, but post-season is more important.


Ray actually played well against the spurs...his stats don't look good because in game 1 he left with an injury early in the middle of the first quarter which he had 8 points... game 2 he scored 25, game 3 he had 20 7, and 7 game 4 he dropped 32 and game 6 he scored 25 again...game 5 was his only bad game that series... and not to mention where pierce failed in the first round ray put up 33 6 and 5...so id believe that constitutes being better that yr

and for your second quote your basically saying that because reggie played better in the postseason (which he never won anything) we should disregard everything else that ray did better then him...that logic makes no sense at all really...and if anything in their primes reggie played marginally better in the big stage...the fact is ray is just a superior player then reggie and had a superior career period

[StateOfMind12]

so id believe that constitutes being better that yr
So It's Pierce's fault that his team was worse? It's Pierce's fault that played against a better team and a better defense in the 1st round even though he put up great numbers himself?

Ray's numbers vs. the Spurs were not even close to being as good as Pierce's numbers vs. the Pacers or even his own numbers vs. the shitty Kings defense.

I can cherry pick and take away games from Pierce too which makes his series vs. Pacers even better. Pierce in Game 1 only scored 12 points and shot 2/11, yet he still put up 51% shooting and 23 ppg. I would like to know how much better Pierce's numbers would be if I cherry picked like you but I don't need to cherry pick to make a point.

I don't care if Ray had a better year because having a better year usually just means having a better situation and better teammates. Ray was not a better player though, he never was and he never will be.


and for your second quote your basically saying that because reggie played better in the postseason (which he never won anything) we should disregard everything else that ray did better then him
There is a better slight difference in Ray's ability advanage over Reggie.

On the other hand, there is a HUGE difference in Reggie's post-season performances than Ray's. It's not always about how many differences, it's sometimes about how big the differences are.



.the fact is ray is just a superior player then reggie and had a superior career period
Keep telling yourself that.

[Boston C's]

So It's Pierce's fault that his team was worse? It's Pierce's fault that played against a better team and a better defense in the 1st round even though he put up great numbers himself?

Ray's numbers vs. the Spurs were not even close to being as good as Pierce's numbers vs. the Pacers or even his own numbers vs. the shitty Kings defense.

I can cherry pick and take away games from Pierce too which makes his series vs. Pacers even better. Pierce in Game 1 only scored 12 points and shot 2/11, yet he still put up 51% shooting and 23 ppg. I would like to know how much better Pierce's numbers would be if I cherry picked like you but I don't need to cherry pick to make a point.

I don't care if Ray had a better year because having a better year usually just means having a better situation and better teammates. Ray was not a better player though, he never was and he never will be.


There is a better slight difference in Ray's ability advanage over Reggie.

On the other hand, there is a HUGE difference in Reggie's post-season performances than Ray's. It's not always about how many differences, it's sometimes about how big the differences are.



Keep telling yourself that.

for one the celtics were better...two the sonics sucked everyone picked them to finish last that yr just face that ray was a better leader and a better player then pierce that yr period...im not cherry picking ray played 5 minutes and scored 8 points and never returned so how is that cherry picking he probably would have scored 30 if he was healthy that game...and yea I'll keep telling myself that ray is superior to reggie because its true and theres no way around it...go look at their stats and accomplishments one more time...once again and for the last time ray did literally EVERYTHING better then reggie on the court and his career its just fact and theres no disputing it but your entitled to your own opinion...i wont debate this anymore

[StateOfMind12]

for one the celtics were better...two the sonics sucked everyone picked them to finish last that yr
No they weren't. Pierce had nobody on his team in 2005 while Ray had Rashard and good bigs. Pierce had literally no one. He had Antoine Walker back who was declining, cancerous Ricky Davis, and 40 year old Gary Payton? That's really better than what Ray had in Seattle, alright :rolleyes:


just face that ray was a better leader and a better player then pierce that yr period
How was Ray a better player that year?

What could Ray do that year that he couldn't ever do? Did Ray all of a sudden just pass better? Did Ray get to the hoop better? Did Ray rebound better? Defend better?

No he didn't. Ray was never better than Pierce as a player, ever because there was nothing Ray could do that Pierce couldn't. Ray was a better shooter that was it, Pierce was a better scorer, better slasher, better ball-handler, better passer, better rebounder, better defender, you want anymore?

Ray is a better shooter than just about every NBA player in NBA history, so if shooting is all you care about than Ray is the GOAT. Ray was not better than Pierce ever and at anything besides shooting, that's just the truth.

It's funny how you say Ray was better than Reggie at everything so there is no debate. The same could be said about Pierce vs. Ray, but you are arguing that Ray was better than Pierce at one point, nice double standard, idiot.

[TheBigVeto]

This is just a simple question...

To you people who pick Dennis Rodman here, if you had to pick between Reggie Miller and Dennis Rodman, who would it be?

Be honest now...

I know what my answer would be, all due respect to Dennis Rodman, he also belongs here somewhere in the standings... but not ahead of Reggie in my list... no god damn way.... Rodman was not a go-to-guy, he was not a franchise player that would impact you in a way you could win unless that team already had that go-to-guy / franchise player, he was only a complimentary player TO TOP 50 PEOPLE LIKE REGGIE MILLER........

Are you really gona act like rings is what separates Rodman over Reggie? Just because he was blessed of having to play with what i consider is the greatest team ever? Switch teams where Reggie Miller would play next to Jordan for the Bulls and Rodman would play next to Pooh Richardson (who? exactly) for the Pacers and i can guarantee you he would have the same championships.... and i can guarantee you Rodman would be remembered as nothing but a rebounding showman.... Rings are overrated that way...

Sometimes, you do make good posts.

[haji_d_robertas]

Kevin Durant

[Boston C's]

No they weren't. Pierce had nobody on his team in 2005 while Ray had Rashard and good bigs. Pierce had literally no one. He had Antoine Walker back who was declining, cancerous Ricky Davis, and 40 year old Gary Payton? That's really better than what Ray had in Seattle, alright :rolleyes:


How was Ray a better player that year?

What could Ray do that year that he couldn't ever do? Did Ray all of a sudden just pass better? Did Ray get to the hoop better? Did Ray rebound better? Defend better?

No he didn't. Ray was never better than Pierce as a player, ever because there was nothing Ray could do that Pierce couldn't. Ray was a better shooter that was it, Pierce was a better scorer, better slasher, better ball-handler, better passer, better rebounder, better defender, you want anymore?

Ray is a better shooter than just about every NBA player in NBA history, so if shooting is all you care about than Ray is the GOAT. Ray was not better than Pierce ever and at anything besides shooting, that's just the truth.

It's funny how you say Ray was better than Reggie at everything so there is no debate. The same could be said about Pierce vs. Ray, but you are arguing that Ray was better than Pierce at one point, nice double standard, idiot.

for one i know how big of an idiot you are when you say we had good bigs...we had horrible bigs are you freakin kiddin me jerome james and vivaly potapenko gtfo :facepalm Yes pierce was better then ray at almost every asset of basketball but ill say passing is a wash between them... and I'm talking about one yr and how ray was more successful and played better then him for one freakin yr and you wanna act like im tryin to say he all of a sudden got new skills...he didn't ray just played better then pierce that yr period and the sonics winning 52 games was an abberation that yr the team was flat out garbage...ray had rashard and a bunch of scrubs and shard bitched out of the 05 playoffs with a bum toe...ray literally was on his own for half hte series against san antonio and still managed to win a game and give them a run for their money... you wanna try and tell me that pierce was better in the 05 playoffs that yr your out of your freakin mind...first round exit with home court advantage...ill take pierces team every day of the week and twice on sundays over that garbage sonics team ray had the entire yr

pierces 05 celtics team was arguably his best talent since the big 3 get together...shit happens the pacers team was underrated that yr but you cant ignore the fact tha tpierce lost with homecourt advantage and failed as a leader... (see game 6) where his scrub teammates literally bailed out his stupidity in o.t

just stop seriously nobody is saying ray is better then pierce all time or anything im just saying ray is better then reggie all time and comparing ray to pierce is a hell of a lot closer then comparing reggie to ray...don't believe me go look at what both ray and pierce accomplished before they got together...their career accomplishments practically mirror each other while comparing ray to reggie ray literally leaves reggie in the dust

ray vs reggie is not a debate period

[Whoah10115]

Thurmond certainly has a better case than Worthy and Pierce.

But Thurmond, unlike those two, proved he could be a franchise player.


Thurmond had a higher peak, that alone puts him in the debate with a guy like Pierce. Thurmond never won a title, but got close a lot more often than Pierce and unlike Pierce could lead a team that had a chance at winning the title.



Strongly disagree. I'd go as far as to say I can't really understand the case for Thurmond over Pierce. I mean, I can understand what people are saying and why, but not in context.


Tho I do have consideration for Thurmond ahead of Miller. He was such a terrific defender. Shame that Kareem made so many All-Defensive Teams over Thurmond. That's ridiculous.

[Whoah10115]

It was not one time. And I assure you...if we go into Larry Brown quotes on reggie miller he wont come out looking good. Especially considering how much more likely a coach is to offer praise of his own players in public than to say what he really feels if its negative. Really:








And it wasnt just Larry:




At the time...Larry Brown...a basketball lifer and obsessive lover of the game and HOF coach of the Pacers...ranks Mckey over Reggie. Phil Jackson...HOF coach of a division rival who has been playing Reggie over for years...rans Mckey over reggie. national media names 4 people not in this top 50 to the All NBA team over reggie. Millions of fans do not vote him into the ASG....and the NBA coaches see fit to name Kenny Anderson and Mookie Blaylock to the team on the bench and not Reggie.

But here we are 18 years later and people who barely remember it or dont...have Reggie top 50 all time and guys over him probably not top 100. doesnt...strike anyone as odd? That these esteemed basketball people didnt think highly of Reggie but 20 years later people who dont remember it would say Reggie was better at the time...and we act like the people NOW know better about the past than NBA coaches did in their present?

And before Reggie hit his prime?

That idea really annoys me at times. Reggie Miller was older than Kevin Durant is now in 1990. But people act like he didnt come into his own till he was 30.

Reggie Miller was as good as he ever was in 1989. I watched him back then. He didnt get much better at anything but passing and his athletic ability fell off unusually early and his faceup game back then got him more than his post up game did in the late 90s.

Anyway....as I said. Little to justify even discussing Reggie at the moment and all its gonna do is get 22 year olds who dont remember the real Reggie to vote for him out of name value just like other 90s/early 2000s players.

I dont have to tell you what Dennis Johnson, Billy Cunningham, Paul Westphal, Jojo white, Sidney Moncrief, Tiny Archibald, Earl Monroe and so on did. But a lot of people who dont know...will see Reggie Miller discussion...and vote for him over them. Not because of looking into them and deciding hes better or did more(laughable for at least 4 of them).

But because Reggie Miller played when they were kids and they know more about him.

Hes gonna start getting votes from people who dont know the others soon and while there is nothing to be done about it...I dont need to have some long argument thats just gonna get his name mentioned 70 times and have more deserving/accomplished/talented players disregarded because this is 2012 and nobody cares about Dennis Johnson anymore.




I'm sorry but you're gonna have to lose this one. Every quote is out of context. In the Larry Brown quote, it says "ever the pessimist". That's like Mourinho ripping his players just to light a fire.


Phil Jackson likes all-around players. So he singled out McKey, in the middle of one season. But if he was coaching the Pacers, you think McKey would be his best player? Only if McKey stepped up and lived up fully to his potential. And if you wanna go on that, that's not a knock on Miller, but both a compliment and a knock on McKey, for his abilities and for his inability to maximize.



I would definitely take Reggie over Rodman. Ray as well. Between the two...Ray has a more all-around game, but despite PPG averages, Reggie is the better scorer. If he was given the same license to score in his prime as he was given earlier in his career and in the playoffs, his average would be a lot higher. But he still was nasty in the playoffs, and that offense was what it was. His career average is lower than it should be, because he kept playing.


There is plenty of argument for Reggie being top 50 and there would certainly be no argument for him not being top 100 (don't know if you're suggesting that). His stats are deceiving. He's scored 22 and 24 PPG before, and that was before his prime. And in that stacked NBA, he led his teams to the playoffs when scoring like that.



Larry Brown loves the system offense. He was perfect for that Detroit team. He loves coaching players up. Reggie's game fit very naturally and he sacrificed points but not worth or value to his team. And they needed him to go outside the offense, he delivered.



If you're going to argue against him, argue fairly. Your arguments are not fair at all. And they're not accurate.



I have take Reggie Miller...unless I'm forgetting someone, which is very possible.

[StateOfMind12]

for one i know how big of an idiot you are when you say we had good bigs...we had horrible bigs are you freakin kiddin me jerome james and vivaly potapenko gtfo :facepalm
James stepped up in the post-season which was why the Knicks offered him that fat contract. His bigs was also better than whatever the hell Pierce was playing with pre-KG.

You also ignored how Ray played with Nick Collison in 2005 who is an underrated big. It's funny how you bring up Potapenko before you bring up Fortson, Collison, Vlad, and Evans who all played more minutes than he did especially in the post-season.

I'm sure there was no bias in that. :rolleyes:


and I'm talking about one yr and how ray was more successful and played better then him for one freakin yr and you wanna act like im tryin to say he all of a sudden got new skills.
I'm telling you that Pierce was better than Ray ever was as an overall player.

I know Ray had a better season in 2005, but big shit. Ray had a better team/situation one year than Pierce did, what am I suppose to be impressed about?

It doesn't mean Ray was better than Pierce as a player because he never was and he never will be. Pierce was just too rounded while Ray was close to one-dimensional.



ill take pierces team every day of the week and twice on sundays over that garbage sonics team ray had the entire yr
If you switch their teams in 2005, Ray would probably end up missing the playoffs in Boston while Pierce would still get to the 2nd round with the Sonics because Pierce was better.

[Whoah10115]

To add to the Ray/Pierce thing. Ray definitely had the better season in 2005, but that certainly doesn't mean he was the better player then. He had the better season. It's one year.


And there is no way that those Celtics were as good as those Sonics. James stepped up in the playoffs and sucked prior to that. But Evans has always been underrated, Ridnour was very good (and really is right now too). Lewis was legit as an all-star that year and as a general borderline all-star. I loved that Seattle team for a reason. They were good. It crashed the next year, but then again Pierce had maybe his best season in 2005/06 and they didn't make the playoffs that year for the first time in who knows how long...There were maybe 5 players in the league that could have been plugged into Pierce's situation and taken that team to the playoffs, unless someone actually wants to account for what the coach does and the options available.

[Boston C's]

James stepped up in the post-season which was why the Knicks offered him that fat contract. His bigs was also better than whatever the hell Pierce was playing with pre-KG.

You also ignored how Ray played with Nick Collison in 2005 who is an underrated big. It's funny how you bring up Potapenko before you bring up Fortson, Collison, Vlad, and Evans who all played more minutes than he did especially in the post-season.

I'm sure there was no bias in that. :rolleyes:


I'm telling you that Pierce was better than Ray ever was as an overall player.

I know Ray had a better season in 2005, but big shit. Ray had a better team/situation one year than Pierce did, what am I suppose to be impressed about?

It doesn't mean Ray was better than Pierce as a player because he never was and he never will be. Pierce was just too rounded while Ray was close to one-dimensional.



If you switch their teams in 2005, Ray would probably end up missing the playoffs in Boston while Pierce would still get to the 2nd round with the Sonics because Pierce was better.

James stepped up and made his money off of one series..he was trash against the spurs and in that king series he basically offsetted rashard lewis playing like absolute ass..rashard probably had 1 good game that entire first round and didn't play pretty much at all in the second...you wanna talk about bigs alright...regular season...jerome james and potapenko were trash... reggie evans did his job i always liked him and radman was good at shooting 3's but he was literally our 3rd option on offense and thats horrible if you have radman as your third option..fortson was too busy fouling out getting techs and flagrant fouls then being on the court he was a bruiser and nothing more...dude was probably more hated by the refs then sheed at that point and thats saying a lot and that leaves collison who was essentially a rookie since he broke his foot and missed his entire rookie season...am i missing anything? Absolute trash...collison didnt see big minutes since he was a rookie and evans was our best big...i repeat reggie evans was our best big

you should be impressed that ray was in a much tougher conference to make the playoffs and not only made it but won 52 games with a mediocre at best roster

your third quote is absolutely asine and shows me you never watched ray allen ball at all...to call him close to one dimensional in his prime is absurd...ray was one of the top scorers in the league in his prime and was a do it all player who had a good all around game...makes me think you started watching ray allen only when he came to boston because in the sonics and bucks ray scored in a variety of ways...was pierce better all around then ray absolutely...was ray one dimensional? absolutely not and kind of makes me think that your either a ray allen hater or someone who rarely followed his career

your 4th statement actually made me laugh more then the third one...so what your saying is lets swap rosters and put ray in a much weaker eastern conference and he'll miss the playoffs when you don't even have to be .500 :facepalm

ray could definitely get over 40 wins with that boston roster...you switch him with pierce you probably get the same result in a sense that boston loses in the first round

[Boston C's]

To add to the Ray/Pierce thing. Ray definitely had the better season in 2005, but that certainly doesn't mean he was the better player then. He had the better season. It's one year.


And there is no way that those Celtics were as good as those Sonics. James stepped up in the playoffs and sucked prior to that. But Evans has always been underrated, Ridnour was very good (and really is right now too). Lewis was legit as an all-star that year and as a general borderline all-star. I loved that Seattle team for a reason. They were good. It crashed the next year, but then again Pierce had maybe his best season in 2005/06 and they didn't make the playoffs that year for the first time in who knows how long...There were maybe 5 players in the league that could have been plugged into Pierce's situation and taken that team to the playoffs, unless someone actually wants to account for what the coach does and the options available.

I'm just suggesting ray had a better yr then pierce but i still think the celtics were more talented then the sonics...rashard lewis actually played better the following yrs after his all star berth...his 05 season wasn't even his best as a sonic...as for ridnour as much as i liked him he struggled against good pg's and theres a reason that he often sat in the 4th in favor of antonio daniels that yr who is a seasoned vet...the reason the sonics crashed the next yr was because mcmillan left and that season was just an abberation...you replay that 05 yr again i have serious doubts the sonics win 52 games

pierces 06 yr i agree with...he probably had his best yr but his team was God awful and I didn't think it would be worse until the next yr lol...but it also goes to show you how good his 05 team was...losing a lot of key players then having a significant drop off even though pierce significantly raised his game to another level

[haji_d_robertas]

Kevin Durant

[Whoah10115]

I'm just suggesting ray had a better yr then pierce but i still think the celtics were more talented then the sonics...rashard lewis actually played better the following yrs after his all star berth...his 05 season wasn't even his best as a sonic...as for ridnour as much as i liked him he struggled against good pg's and theres a reason that he often sat in the 4th in favor of antonio daniels that yr who is a seasoned vet...the reason the sonics crashed the next yr was because mcmillan left and that season was just an abberation...you replay that 05 yr again i have serious doubts the sonics win 52 games

pierces 06 yr i agree with...he probably had his best yr but his team was God awful and I didn't think it would be worse until the next yr lol...but it also goes to show you how good his 05 team was...losing a lot of key players then having a significant drop off even though pierce significantly raised his game to another level



Agree on Lewis, tho I still disagree on the talent. Another thing they had tho was Nake McMillan. He's been a little up and down with Portland (Portland is), but I think he's a great coach and did an awesome job with Seattle. That team was going places too. I think Ridnour would have developed more. Shame he left. They may have overacheived that season, but they could have gotten a lot better had he stayed around.