Which Players Have Gotten the Most Overrated Since Retirement

[SilkkTheShocker]

Who ya got?

[NumberSix]

Probably Bill Russell.

[SilkkTheShocker]

Probably Bill Russell.

Its one thing to put him in the top 10 for his achievements. Is another to flat out say he was a better player than guys like Kareem, Shaq, Duncan, Hilton Armstrong, etc.

[elementally morale]

Probably Bill Russell.

You misunderstood the question I think.

Bill Russell was most definitely top 2 when he retired. He is not any better than top 2 now... he didn't get overrrated a lot. He was thought to be great when he retired and he is thought to have been great now.

The OP had a nice and very tough question. Basically, you need players who were not as highly rated when retired as high they are rated now. Hakeem is a good example, but I don't think he is overrated now.

[NumberSix]

The Magic/Bird thing is really weird.

When they were playing it was pretty universally agreed that Bird was the best player in the NBA. After they retired, now you pretty much NEVER see Bird ranked ahead of magic.

[Rubio2Gasol]

Probably Magic.

[Rubio2Gasol]

The Magic/Bird thing is really weird.

When they were playing it was pretty universally agreed that Bird was the best player in the NBA. After they retired, now you pretty much NEVER see Bird ranked ahead of magic.

Magic is a nice, funny guy with an inspirational story. Bird is a fat white asshole who owns a team everyone hates.

Nonetheless Magic's talent has not been exaggerated, but how good he was as a player and the sense that he understood the game the best, that has been grossly exaggerated. Magic's way was hardly hardly perfect.

[NumberSix]

To a degree, Michael Jordan. Some people act like he was the best ever at every aspect of the game, never missed a big shot.

[elementally morale]

To a degree, Michael Jordan. Some people act like he was the best ever at every aspect of the game, never missed a big shot.

He is a very good candidate, but overrating him started while he still played. It started at around 1996-1997. He is constantly overrated since then. I'm not saying he wasn't the best player of all time, but people are pretending as if he is in a league of his own which is untrue.

[Ne 1]

Reggie Miller.

[jstern]

The Magic/Bird thing is really weird.

When they were playing it was pretty universally agreed that Bird was the best player in the NBA. After they retired, now you pretty much NEVER see Bird ranked ahead of magic.
This right here. Times 100.

I mean I was too young then, but I remember a few years ago, everyone had Bird ahead of Magic in almost everyone's top 10 list, and then I found it so odd how that was switch, and it became a big no no to say Bird was ahead of Magic. Which shows how useless people's list are since it's all based on how they feel now, while being completely ignorant of the absolute reality of every moment of every star player that ever played, and their circumstances each and every year.

[tikay0]

Reggie Miller.

Dammit!!! You beat me to it.

[Rake2204]

I want to preface this by saying I still think he was a great player and did a ton for his team and all that other good stuff but... I feel the legend of Dennis Rodman has really taken off for him post-retirement - to the point where I see the words "genius", "mastermind", and "greatest defensive player of all-time" thrown around freely, as if there's no debating whether they're true.

[jstern]

He is a very good candidate, but overrating him started while he still played. It started at around 1996-1997. He is constantly overrated since then. I'm not saying he wasn't the best player of all time, but people are pretending as if he is in a league of his own which is untrue.

He is on a league of his own, at least for those who saw him play. I didn't like the guy too, while he played, but recognized his skills and mental ability. I would say he's eventually going to be underrated due to people who didn't saw him play.


I want to preface this by saying I still think he was a great player and did a ton for his team and all that other good stuff but... I feel the legend of Dennis Rodman has really taken off for him post-retirement - to the point where I see the words "genius", "mastermind", and "greatest defensive player of all-time" thrown around freely, as if there's no debating whether they're true.

I used to think he was a genius when he played, due to his mind games that got the person he was guarding thrown out of the game, and how smart he was about rebounding. So it doesn't surprised me that people throw the word genius around. Back then I remember some people thinking he was a thug, bad person, totally not seeing his genius. So I'm glad people are seeing his genius now, though I really don't see a lot of people calling him genius. Maybe you saw my other comment today about Dennis in which I think I did call him smart.

Now in real life, he doesn't seem that smart.

[willds09]

Reggie Miller.
Very overrated, one of tha biggest flopperz in NBA history:rolleyes:

[Dro]

He is a very good candidate, but overrating him started while he still played. It started at around 1996-1997. He is constantly overrated since then. I'm not saying he wasn't the best player of all time, but people are pretending as if he is in a league of his own which is untrue.
No, he IS in a league of his own....He just is..:confusedshrug:

[elementally morale]

He is on a league of his own, at least for those who saw him play. I didn't like the guy too, while he played, but recognized his skills and mental ability. I would say he's eventually going to be underrated due to people who didn't saw him play.

I saw him play. But I saw Bird and Magic play before him and a good chunk of Kareem. I've seen quite a few of them play. MJ was great, may have been the greatest of all time, but there were others not any worse. Peak Bird is not any worse. Peak Shaq is not any worse. I highly doubt peak Kareem and peak Wilt were any worse. They are a few marketing campaigns behind, that's basically it.

[NumberSix]

Reggie Miller.
I don't know about that. I mean, how highly is he even rated. Most people don't even think he's a HOFer

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Pippen, and dude is one of my favorite players ever. :oldlol:

He's just not what people make him out to be.

[NumberSix]

I saw him play. But I saw Bird and Magic play before him and a good chunk of Kareem. I've seen quite a few of them play. MJ was great, may have been the greatest of all time, but there were others not any worse. Peak Bird is not any worse. Peak Shaq is not any worse. I highly doubt peak Kareem and peak Wilt were any worse. They are a few marketing campaigns behind, that's basically it.
MJ is no doubt on the short list. The problem is people who act like its preposterous to not think he's the runaway best.

[NumberSix]

Pippen, and dude is one of my favorite players ever. :oldlol:

He's just not what people make him out to be.
He is defensively, but he was a pretty average offensive player.

[DonDadda59]

Judging by some of the ridiculous things said on this forum by some, Scottie Pippen.

Scottie Pippen>Dwyane Wade or Scottie Pippen=Lebron James are things people have actually typed and posted with a straight face.

[NumberSix]

Judging by some of the ridiculous things said on this forum by some, Scottie Pippen.

Scottie Pippen>Dwyane Wade or Scottie Pippen=Lebron James are things people have actually typed and posted with a straight face.
Well, they don't say that to elevate Pippen. They say that to demean the other guys

[jstern]

I also wouldn't say that Miller is overrated now. Maybe more overrated when he played and was a respected star player, and like most respected star players, like lets say an Iverson, many times their names are thrown around to point out how bad a current player is. Like, "this player is no good, he's just a Reggie Milller." Sorry, I can't think of a better phrase to use as an example.

But for example, Iverson, he was looked as the man, but now a days people bring him up as if he was a horrible player. And I guess many players that are phrased today will also have the same fate by future generations.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Judging by some of the ridiculous things said on this forum by some, Scottie Pippen.

Scottie Pippen>Dwyane Wade or Scottie Pippen=Lebron James are things people have actually typed and posted with a straight face.

Exactly this.

[HiphopRelated]

Reggie Miller.
yes

[SilkkTheShocker]

Not an overrated player, but I think Hakeem gets a little overrated when it comes to legacy. You would Shaq or Duncan has a greater chance of getting knocked off the top 10 list before him.

[unbreakable]

scottie pippen is UNDERRATED.. tell me why hes the only Co-Alpha or 1-2 punch who isnt in the top 10? ...

magic/kareem, kobe/shaq are easily top 10, yet pippen, who anchored the defense and primary playmaking duties for 6 rings is left out? makes no sense.

pippen >> wade easily in terms of everything (leadership, defense, skill, hunger etc)

[elementally morale]

Not an overrated player, but I think Hakeem gets a little overrated when it comes to legacy. You would Shaq or Duncan has a greater chance of getting knocked off the top 10 list before him.

ALl 3 players have their cult of followers so fans of all 3 happen to believe their big guy is uunderrated compared to the other two. But the fact of the matter is, you easily build a case for all three being better than the other 2.

For Shaq, the case is built aroundd dominance, fur Duncan it's teamplay and for Hakeem it's offensive skillls and killer defense. To me, Hakeem was the most entertaning to watch. so he is my favorite player of the 3. (And 2nd favorite all-time only behind Magic.) But I can easily understand people having Shaq and/or Duncan ahead of him as far as the GOAT list is concerned.

[D.J.]

Reggie Miller, Pippen, Barkley

[SilkkTheShocker]

ALl 3 players have their cult of followers so fans of all 3 happen to believe their big guy is uunderrated compared to the other two. But the fact of the matter is, you easily build a case for all three being better than the other 2.

For Shaq, the case is built aroundd dominance, fur Duncan it's teamplay and for Hakeem it's offensive skillls and killer defense. To me, Hakeem was the most entertaning to watch. so he is my favorite player of the 3. (And 2nd favorite all-time only behind Magic.) But I can easily understand people having Shaq and/or Duncan ahead of him as far as the GOAT list is concerned.

I agree with most of this. I just feel Hakeem is the closest of the 3 to getting bumped off the top 10.

[tpols]

Definitely MJ.. It was an image brand thing after a while.. You'd think he was god. Watch this clip below at the 5 minute mark. MJ says twice he isn't about trash talk, doesn't do it.. Of course they showed he was probably the best trash talker ever right after wards. :lol

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91LD9VlJqhU&feature=youtube_gdata_player

It's about protecting the money.. Make him look like a better guy than he is. Pure exxageration, like your marketing the next apple product.

[tpols]

And it's funny in that same video magic says he doesn't talk.. Lets the W's do the talking for him. Can you imagine magic not.. talking? That dude definitely talked shit.. More marketing.

[SilkkTheShocker]

Not retired yet, but there are already people building up the legend of Grant Hill.

[DatAsh]

Definitely MJ.. It was an image brand thing after a while.. You'd think he was god. Watch this clip below at the 5 minute mark. MJ says twice he isn't about trash talk, doesn't do it.. Of course they showed he was probably the best trash talker ever right after wards. :lol

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91LD9VlJqhU&feature=youtube_gdata_player

It's about protecting the money.. Make him look like a better guy than he is. Pure exxageration, like your marketing the next apple product.

Where do you think Jordan should rank?

[D.J.]

Not retired yet, but there are already people building up the legend of Grant Hill.


To be fair, Hill was the LeBron of his time. He averaged 22/8/6 in his first 6 seasons. Injuries definitely took away from what could have been, but he hasn't been on a superstar level in 13 years. Many people here can't recall how sick he was before he got hurt.

[SilkkTheShocker]

To be fair, Hill was the LeBron of his time. He averaged 22/8/6 in his first 6 seasons. Injuries definitely took away from what could have been, but he hasn't been on a superstar level in 13 years. Many people here can't recall how sick he was before he got hurt.

I remember watching him in his prime. But the guy was never a real #1 option imo. He was the KG of small forwards imo. He put up the stats a #1 would, but he never struck me as the guy that going to carry the team.

[tpols]

Where do you think Jordan should rank?
It's fine to have him at the top spot.. He actually has the best case of anyone. But people literally scoff at you if you say someone else is better. If you put..

Larry Bird on the Knicks(instead of starks)
Magic on Portland(instead of porter)
Wilt on the Warriors(instead of webber)
Kareem on the Jazz(instead of malone)

In the 90s with equal teams Is MJ going to lead the Bulls past all of them every year? There's probably a different champion every year.

[PJR]

pippen >> wade easily in terms of everything (leadership, defense, skill, hunger etc)

Humor me as to how Pippen is a better leader than Wade? Is pouting on the bench, and refusing to enter the play when the coach draws up a play for Toni Kukoc in a late game situation an example of this said great leadership?

[elementally morale]

It's fine to have him at the top spot.. He actually has the best case of anyone. But people literally scoff at you if you say someone else is better. If you put..

Larry Bird on the Knicks(instead of starks)
Magic on Portland(instead of porter)
Wilt on the Warriors(instead of webber)
Kareem on the Jazz(instead of malone)

In the 90s with equal teams Is MJ going to lead the Bulls past all of them every year? There's probably a different champion every year.

Yeah. Seconded. And while we are at it, let's put prime Shaq on Phoenix, next to Barkley and instead of Oliver Miller.

[Poetry]

Reggie Miller, Pippen, Barkley

Barkley is underrated.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

It's fine to have him at the top spot.. He actually has the best case of anyone. But people literally scoff at you if you say someone else is better. If you put..

Larry Bird on the Knicks(instead of starks)
Magic on Portland(instead of porter)
Wilt on the Warriors(instead of webber)
Kareem on the Jazz(instead of malone)

In the 90s with equal teams Is MJ going to lead the Bulls past all of them every year? There's probably a different champion every year.

:confusedshrug:

You can do this for every all-time great, Kobe (your boy) included.

[SilkkTheShocker]

Wade's 2006 title alone absolutely craps on anything Scottie did.

[D.J.]

I remember watching him in his prime. But the guy was never a real #1 option imo. He was the KG of small forwards imo. He put up the stats a #1 would, but he never struck me as the guy that going to carry the team.


Sure looked like a #1 option in '96 when he led the Pistons to 46 wins and a playoff appearance with Allan Houston, an aging Joe Dumars, a past his prime Otis Thorpe, Lindsey Hunter, and Mark West and Don Reid splitting starts at center.

Looked like a #1 option again the following season leading the Pistons to 54 wins with Dumars, Hunter, Thorpe, and the starting center spot split between Theo Ratliff, Reid, and Grant Long.

[D.J.]

Barkley is underrated.


No he's not. He took way too many plays off on D and his work ethic was questionable on his best day. Pippen himself even slammed Barkley on that very issue.

[tpols]

:confusedshrug:

You can do this for every all-time great, Kobe (your boy) included.
Not really.. Some players are better than others. Kobe doesn't have a case for GOAT. He probably wouldn't beat MJ given equal teams. Bird, Magic, Russell, Wilt, and Kareem could. I feel like it takes a mixture of the mentality and the dominance.

Russell had it the best in his head even if he wasn't as dominant. Wilt had straight dominance with average mentality.. Kareem is just like Wilt. Michael Magic and Bird all had it 100 on both.. But they weren't big men so there were some things they just couldn't help.

Shaq had 100 dominance and 0 Mentality. Kobe's probably 50/50.

[lilgodfather1]

Jordan, Moses, Oscar.

Baylor is the most under.

[TheMarkMadsen]

Shaq

Does anybody else find it ironic that he's only considered the "MDE" for the 3 years of his career where he played with another top 10 GOAT?

His Orlando teams were stacked, got swept by Hakkeem in the finals.

His Lakers teams didn't go anywhere until Kobe developed into a top 5 player in the league

Dude played with 3 of the best guards in his era. 1 top 10 GOAT 1 top 25 GOAT.

Great player, but the "MDE" thing gets tossed around way to much, you're not really the "MDE" when you couldn't get it done with Penny, got swept by a Hakeem led Rockets team and only won championships when you had a top 2 player in the League playing beside you.

Dominant? yes, MDE? no

[DonDadda59]

It's fine to have him at the top spot.. He actually has the best case of anyone. But people literally scoff at you if you say someone else is better. If you put..

Larry Bird on the Knicks(instead of starks)
Magic on Portland(instead of porter)
Wilt on the Warriors(instead of webber)
Kareem on the Jazz(instead of malone)

In the 90s with equal teams Is MJ going to lead the Bulls past all of them every year? There's probably a different champion every year.


Yeah. Seconded. And while we are at it, let's put prime Shaq on Phoenix, next to Barkley and instead of Oliver Miller.

This is extremely flawed logic if I've ever seen it :oldlol:

Put Michael Jordan on the Lakers instead of Magic or put him on the Celtics instead of Bird in the 80s and have those guys see how great they look playing with Orlando Woolridge and Quintin Daley as their best teammates.

Or take Shaq off the 3-peat Lakers and replace him with Luc Longley.
Put Lebron on the Magic instead of Rashard Lewis.

It's an easy game to play, but it doesn't change the facts, does it?

[SilkkTheShocker]

Shaq

Does anybody else find it ironic that he's only considered the "MDE" for the 3 years of his career where he played with another top 10 GOAT?

His Orlando teams were stacked, got swept by Hakkeem in the finals.

His Lakers teams didn't go anywhere until Kobe developed into a top 5 player in the league

Dude played with 3 of the best guards in his era. 1 top 10 GOAT 1 top 25 GOAT.

Great player, but the "MDE" thing gets tossed around way to much, you're not really the "MDE" when you couldn't get it done with Penny, got swept by a Hakeem led Rockets team and only won championships when you had a top 2 player in the League playing beside you.

Dominant? yes, MDE? no

I have honestly never seen you post anything that wasn't drooling all over Kobe's balls.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Not really.. Some players are better than others. Kobe doesn't have a case for GOAT. He probably wouldn't beat MJ given equal teams. Bird, Magic, Russell, Wilt, and Kareem could. I feel like it takes a mixture of the mentality and the dominance.

Russell had it the best in his head even if he wasn't as dominant. Wilt had straight dominance with average mentality.. Kareem is just like Wilt. Michael Magic and Bird all had it 100 on both.. But they weren't big men so there were some things they just couldn't help.

Shaq had 100 dominance and 0 Mentality. Kobe's probably 50/50.

I get what you're saying ...

BUT as much as I like Bird, when you take EVERYTHING into account, when ALL is said and DONE, he isn't going to be that much better than Kobe. Same goes for the second half of the top 10.

Again, IMO, your example(s) are applicable for MOST all-time greats.

[NumberSix]

Not really.. Some players are better than others. Kobe doesn't have a case for GOAT. He probably wouldn't beat MJ given equal teams. Bird, Magic, Russell, Wilt, and Kareem could. I feel like it takes a mixture of the mentality and the dominance.

Russell had it the best in his head even if he wasn't as dominant. Wilt had straight dominance with average mentality.. Kareem is just like Wilt. Michael Magic and Bird all had it 100 on both.. But they weren't big men so there were some things they just couldn't help.

Shaq had 100 dominance and 0 Mentality. Kobe's probably 50/50.
If the teams were equal, couldnt go either way? I mean, Jordan get beat by teams that didn't have anybody as good as Kobe.


Edit: ok I think I misunderstood. You meant outside of MJ and Kobe, the teams were equal. Yeah, you're probably right then.

[dh144498]

I have honestly never seen you post anything that wasn't drooling all over Kobe's balls.

same with you with LEbron.

[Sharmer]

The Magic/Bird thing is really weird.

When they were playing it was pretty universally agreed that Bird was the best player in the NBA. After they retired, now you pretty much NEVER see Bird ranked ahead of magic.

Bird doesn't appear in media as much Magic does. Therefore he kind of slips under the radar and out of discussions.

[SilkkTheShocker]

I also don't think Reggie was overrated. Was he your ideal choice of a #1 option? No. But the guy's teams always made the playoffs and he had great longevity. I don't think anyone is saying he is top 25 or anything crazy like that.

[SilkkTheShocker]

same with you with LEbron.

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=294109

[tpols]

This is extremely flawed logic if I've ever seen it :oldlol:

Put Michael Jordan on the Lakers instead of Magic or put him on the Celtics instead of Bird in the 80s and have those guys see how great they look playing with Orlando Woolridge and Quintin Daley as their best teammates.

Or take Shaq off the 3-peat Lakers and replace him with Luc Longley.
Put Lebron on the Magic instead of Rashard Lewis.

It's an easy game to play, but it doesn't change the facts, does it?
You completely and totally missed the point dude.

[D.J.]

I also don't think Reggie was overrated. Was he your ideal choice of a #1 option? No. But the guy's teams always made the playoffs and he had great longevity. I don't think anyone is saying he is top 25 or anything crazy like that.


The Pacers didn't win more than 42 games until '94 and look who they had:


Haywoode Workman- decent playmaker
Derrick McKey- versatile big man
Dale Davis- double-double PF
Rik Smits- solid scorer and efficient
Byron Scott- double digit points off the bench
Antonio Davis- good defensive big off the bench


Then later on:


Mark Jackson- elite PG
Jalen Rose- versatile PG-SG-SF
Chris Mullin- shell of his former self, but still efficient
Rik Smits
Dale/Antonio Davis
Austin Croshere- good shooting big man


He was overrated. Very clutch for sure, but those Pacers teams were extremely balanced and solid defensively.

[DonDadda59]

pippen >> wade easily in terms of everything (leadership, defense, skill, hunger etc)

Show me one instance of Wade displaying this type of leadership and hunger

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7SbG-8Bvgk

Pippen wasn't suited for top dog status and he knew it, that's why the Bulls worked so seamlessly.

http://citysole.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/joc_10_sp_01.jpg

[DonDadda59]

You completely and totally missed the point dude.

There was no point. It was just you posting impossible hypothetical situations were players from the 60-80s would be magically transported to the 90s to replace players who played during that time. And the whole point was (as usual) to take ridiculous underhanded swipes at the consensus greatest player in the sports History.

Like others have pointed out, you can play that silly game with any team/player from any era. It doesn't change the facts.

[SilkkTheShocker]

Show me one instance of Wade displaying this type of leadership and hunger

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7SbG-8Bvgk

Pippen wasn't suited for top dog status and he knew it, that's why the Bulls worked so seamlessly.

http://citysole.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/joc_10_sp_01.jpg


Man those Jordan X shoes were ****ing ugly. :wtf:

[Anaximandro1]

Shaq

Does anybody else find it ironic that he's only considered the "MDE" for the 3 years of his career where he played with another top 10 GOAT?

His Orlando teams were stacked, got swept by Hakkeem in the finals.

His Lakers teams didn't go anywhere until Kobe developed into a top 5 player in the league

Dude played with 3 of the best guards in his era. 1 top 10 GOAT 1 top 25 GOAT.

Great player, but the "MDE" thing gets tossed around way to much, you're not really the "MDE" when you couldn't get it done with Penny, got swept by a Hakeem led Rockets team and only won championships when you had a top 2 player in the League playing beside you.

Dominant? yes, MDE? no

Olajuwon played 6 playoff games against the Spurs (prime Robinson + Rodman)

Olajuwon vs Spurs


1995 WCF

G1 27 pt

G2 41 pt

G3 43 pt

G4 20 pt

G5 42 pt

G6 39 pt

Avg 35.3 pt


Shaq played 30 playoff games against the Spurs.He scored 30+ points four times.

Shaq vs Spurs



1999 WCSF

21
16
22
36-> 1

Avg 23.8

2001 WCF

28
19
35-> 2
26

Avg 27.0


2002 WCSF

23
19
22
22
21

Avg 21.4


2003 WCSF

24
27
21
29
20
31 -> 3

Avg 25.3


2004 WCSF

19
32 -> 4
28
28
11
17

Avg 22.5


2008 WCFR

11
19
19
14
13

Avg 15.2



(1999 - 2004) Avg 23.9

(1999 - 2008) Avg 22.4

[tpols]

Olajuwon played 6 playoff games against the Spurs (prime Robinson + Rodman)

Olajuwon vs Spurs




Shaq played 30 playoff games against the Spurs.He scored 30+ points four times.

Shaq vs Spurs
Damn that's interesting.. Hakeem beat Shaq head to head too. SHAQ's all muscle and no mind. Pacers, Nets, Mavs, and Sixers.. Probably the weakest collection of big men in the finals ever. Would Shaq ever have beat a team in the Finals with a big man on his level?

[willds09]

Man those Jordan X shoes were ****ing ugly. :wtf:
man u buggin, those 10's were nice:wtf:

[NumberSix]

man u buggin, those 10's were nice:wtf:
This. Them Chicago 10s are some of the most classic Js

[The Choken One]

I don't about once they retire, but prior to retirement LeBron, hands down.

Never have I seen a player get so much undeserved love than him. He FINALLY has a playoffs where he doesn't completely chit the bed in a series (which has previously happpened in ALL of his appearances ) and all the sudden is a top 10 player. I just don't get it.

1/3 alltime in the finals? The statistical equivalent to Derek Fisher in the 4th quarter? Quitting on his team multiple times...

and he's top 10? :biggums:

[SilkkTheShocker]

man u buggin, those 10's were nice:wtf:

I can't stand the 10s. They look Payless shoes. Give me the 4s, 7,s, and 14s. :pimp:

[Rake2204]

I used to think he was a genius when he played, due to his mind games that got the person he was guarding thrown out of the game, and how smart he was about rebounding. So it doesn't surprised me that people throw the word genius around. Back then I remember some people thinking he was a thug, bad person, totally not seeing his genius. So I'm glad people are seeing his genius now, though I really don't see a lot of people calling him genius. Maybe you saw my other comment today about Dennis in which I think I did call him smart.

Now in real life, he doesn't seem that smart.With respect, that's the kind of thinking I disagree with and I think that plays into some folks overrating Dennis Rodman. I found his tactics sometimes clever, but surely not genius.

To be completely blunt, playing the types of mind games that get opponents upset enough to possibly be thrown out of games is a relatively simple process. It's more about someone's willingness to be a jerk. In fact, I employed the same strategies during my playing career and it had nothing to do with some sort of genius mindgame I was playing. It was just a willingness to be coy, a little deceitful, and being able to pick which hot-headed opponent would be most willing to make things about more than just a game. It's a little brother tactic. By that I mean, a lot of little brother's know growing up just the right buttons to push to make the big brother flip out and get in trouble while little brother then stands by innocently.

On the flip side, Rodman also displayed poor on-court judgment in many, many instances. For someone earning a smart or genius tag as much as he seems to, he surely headbutted, threw, and kicked a lot of people in fits of blind rage that did not seem particularly well thought out.

All that said, I learned a lot from Rodman, I employed many of his strategies, and again, I think he was a very good ballplayer, but I just think his folklore sometimes takes on a life of its own.

[Clyde]

Not an overrated player, but I think Hakeem gets a little overrated when it comes to legacy. You would Shaq or Duncan has a greater chance of getting knocked off the top 10 list before him.

Funny I'd say he's under rated. Allthough you're like 16 years old and don't understand anything about anything.

[DatAsh]

It's fine to have him at the top spot.. He actually has the best case of anyone. But people literally scoff at you if you say someone else is better. If you put..

Larry Bird on the Knicks(instead of starks)
Magic on Portland(instead of porter)
Wilt on the Warriors(instead of webber)
Kareem on the Jazz(instead of malone)

In the 90s with equal teams Is MJ going to lead the Bulls past all of them every year? There's probably a different champion every year.

No way Jordan is beating those Knicks or Blazers, but should he really be expected to? Those teams are considerably more talented than his own. I think you'd see a Knicks vs Portland finals every year.

The Blazers were already more talented than the Bulls to begin with, giving them Magic would just be unfair.

[DatAsh]

Yeah. Seconded. And while we are at it, let's put prime Shaq on Phoenix, next to Barkley and instead of Oliver Miller.

Maybe I'm missing your point, but what are you guys trying to prove? No way Jordan is beating these teams you guys are putting together, but does that really mean anything?

You could say that about almost any player, or any championship team.

Give the Thunder Bill Russell instead of Serge Ibacka, do the Heat still win?

Give Orlando Larry Bird instead of Rashard Lewis, do the Lakers still win?

Give Boston Michael Jordan instead of Paul Pierce, do the Lakers still win?

Give LA prime Tim Duncan instead of Pau Gasol, do the Celtics still win?

[DatAsh]

You completely and totally missed the point dude.

I must be missing your point as well.

[unbreakable]

Show me one instance of Wade displaying this type of leadership and hunger


Pippen wasn't suited for top dog status and he knew it, that's why the Bulls worked so seamlessly.


1. one bad play in a million? ill still take pippen

2. pippen was a top dog with jordan. pippen led a JORDANLESS bulls to 55 wins and almost a finals appearance. jordan wasnt even REPLACED.. if they had a suitable REPLACEMENT pippen wouldve won a chip,

pippen was 12 minutes away from a chip with the blazers until kobe/shaq took over. .. he was also the top dog /playmaker on that Blazers squad.

jordan never sniffed a championship without pippen (didnt make playoffs on wizards either).. pippen came close twice.

[wakencdukest]

I've seen Drexler get pretty overrated here.

[Big#50]

Hakeem
Magic

[NBASTATMAN]

Damn that's interesting.. Hakeem beat Shaq head to head too. SHAQ's all muscle and no mind. Pacers, Nets, Mavs, and Sixers.. Probably the weakest collection of big men in the finals ever. Would Shaq ever have beat a team in the Finals with a big man on his level?


Would the Lakers have won any titles without the refs in their back pocket?:eek:

[elementally morale]

I must be missing your point as well.

The point is: Jordan could have easily had much better opponents than he did have. Had he had much better opponents, he would not have 6 rings. He would have 2 or 3. Maybe just 1. He would not be any worse a player, but he sure wouldn't be labelled the GOAT by society with 1 ring alone. Not even with 2 or 3 rings.

To make a long story short: Circumstances.

[ProfessorMurder]

The point is: Jordan could have easily had much better opponents than he did have. Had he had much better opponents, he would not have 6 rings. He would have 2 or 3. Maybe just 1. He would not be any worse a player, but he sure wouldn't be labelled the GOAT by society with 1 ring alone. Not even with 2 or 3 rings.

To make a long story short: Circumstances.

Announcers were calling him the greatest by the late 80s, when he had 0 rings. Wilt and Hakeem are in 95% of peoples' top 10 lists even though they have 2 championships each.

Plus everybody could technically have had better competition.

[elementally morale]

Announcers were calling him the greatest by the late 80s, when he had 0 rings.

I remember much differently. I remember he was thought and said to be a player who is individually great but who will never win anything due to being a selfish chucker who doesn't know shit about teamplay the way Bird and Magic do. Actually, many people thought by the end of the 80s that MJ would never win anything.

It was after 1992, the Olympics and the Dream Team in Barcelona when he started to become a worldwide icon. Soon after the Olympics he retired, and by the time he got back to basketball and won again a year later, he was generally thought of as the best ever.

[unbreakable]

lets hope tim duncan gets overrated into the top 5 discussion where he BELONGS..

as it is hes underrated.. some people dont even have him top 10 LMAO

4 rings as the MVP, defensive ANCHOR (top 5 all time defender) and CLUTCH = top 5 player

[elementally morale]

Wilt and Hakeem are in 95% of peoples' top 10 lists even though they have 2 championships each.

Sure. I didn't want to imply MJ would not even be thought of as a top 10 player. He would just not be the undisputable GOAT had he not won as many rings or had he lost in the Finals a few times, etc. Which could have easily happened with him not being any worse than he was. A simple thing like Bird and Magic not retiring, Pippen not being drafted, PJAx not being available, Shaq arriving a lot sooner... all of these would have changed the landscape for MJ.

I'm not saying he isn't the best payer of all time. All I'm saying is: Those who think it is undisputable are mistaken. Peak Bird and peak Shaq were no worse than peak Jordan.

[Carbine]

Sure. I didn't want to imply MJ would not even be thought of as a top 10 player. He would just not be the undisputable GOAT had he not won as many rings or had he lost in the Finals a few times, etc. Which could have easily happened with him not being any worse than he was. A simple thing like Bird and Magic not retiring, Pippen not being drafted, PJAx not being available, Shaq arriving a lot sooner... all of these would have changed the landscape for MJ.

I'm not saying he isn't the best payer of all time. All I'm saying is: Those who think it is undisputable are mistaken. Peak Bird and peak Shaq were no worse than peak Jordan.

I struggle with that last statement.

One could argue that Larry was every bit as good a total offensive player as Jordan. I don't think you could make a legit argument either way for or against either one of them in that department.

But it's the defensive side of the ball that really makes it an obvious choice to me. Michael has an argument as the GOAT perimeter defender, Bird is nowhere near that.

[elementally morale]

I struggle with that last statement.

One could argue that Larry was every bit as good a total offensive player as Jordan. I don't think you could make a legit argument either way for or against either one of them in that department.

But it's the defensive side of the ball that really makes it an obvious choice to me. Michael has an argument as the GOAT perimeter defender, Bird is nowhere near that.

Jordan was a better defensive player (though he is nowhere near the best perimeter defender of all time, but he is good). Bird was a better offensive player though. He (Bird) was more efficient, not only with his shot but with his allaround offensive numbers. And he was a much better passer and playmaker.

I know it's unheard of if someone says he saw better (as in: more efficient, more effective) offensive players than Jordan, but I saw at least two: peak Bird and peak Shaq. Neither of these players I really like btw, so by no means I want to prop either of them. It's just the 'truth', at least in my perception.

[plowking]

Reggie Miller, Pippen, Rodman, Hakeem and Grant Hill.

[wakencdukest]

Damn that's interesting.. Hakeem beat Shaq head to head too. SHAQ's all muscle and no mind. Pacers, Nets, Mavs, and Sixers.. Probably the weakest collection of big men in the finals ever. Would Shaq ever have beat a team in the Finals with a big man on his level?


Would the Lakers have won any titles without the refs in their back pocket?:eek:


Dude, are you serious? Houston beat Shaqs teams head to head, but Shaq averaged 4 more points and 3 more rebounds against Hakeem and shot 54% compared to Hakeems 44%. Same deal in the playoffs, but Shaq also averaged 2 more blocks per game than Hakeem. And lets not act like Shaq was even in his prime when he faced Hakeem.

[elementally morale]

(...) Shaq averaged 4 more points and 3 more rebounds against Hakeem and shot 54% compared to Hakeems 44%. Same deal in the playoffs, but Shaq also averaged 2 more blocks per game than Hakeem. And lets not act like Shaq was even in his prime when he faced Hakeem.

I think your numbers are a bit off.
Here is some footage from game 1:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hd1D-u8oAfo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9hRoMOAirnU

[NumberSix]

I struggle with that last statement.

One could argue that Larry was every bit as good a total offensive player as Jordan. I don't think you could make a legit argument either way for or against either one of them in that department.

But it's the defensive side of the ball that really makes it an obvious choice to me. Michael has an argument as the GOAT perimeter defender, Bird is nowhere near that.
You could easily make the case that Larry was a better offensive player than Jordan. Clearly a more complete offensive game. That part isn't even debatable.

Don't forget. Jordan wasn't even a D.Wade level shooter for about half of his career. He was excellent at getting to the rim, but his mid range shooting ability has been severely exaggerated over the years. That part didn't really develop til later. When people remember his off the ball catch and shoot game and making super quick decisions in the post, that's really from later in his career. That wasn't there from the beginning.

I think Jordan's passing ability is slightly underrated, but the problem is it wasn't really what he was looking to do. It's not like he averaged 3 assists, but he COULD have had more if that's what he was looking to do. Can't really give him credit for what he hypothetically could do, but didn't.

There's one * though. the NBA was pretty weak defensively until the very late 80's-early 90's.

[wakencdukest]

I think your numbers are a bit off.
Here is some footage from game 1:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hd1D-u8oAfo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9hRoMOAirnU


No, Those numbers are real head to head for every game they played against each other. Now your talking about just the 95 finals, where Hakeems numbers were better. I was talking about the overall playoff numbers. Shaq destroyed Hakeem the second time they met in the playoffs, overall Shaq had better playoff stats, and regular season stats. I also saw all the games and Shaq did get schooled in the finals, there's no denying that. When shaq matured it was a different story. Anyway, the guys extreme bias in that earlier post is what I was refuting. He was acting like Shaq only won in a weak center era, when he came up in the time of DRob, Ewing, Mourning, Hakeem, Mutombo, Smits, and Sabonis. Shaq had his way with all of them at some point, with only Hakeem schooling him regularly early in his career. By the way, I got those numbers from the head to head finder on basketball reference.com

[97 bulls]

You could easily make the case that Larry was a better offensive player than Jordan. Clearly a more complete offensive game. That part isn't even debatable.

Don't forget. Jordan wasn't even a D.Wade level shooter for about half of his career. He was excellent at getting to the rim, but his mid range shooting ability has been severely exaggerated over the years. That part didn't really develop til later. When people remember his off the ball catch and shoot game and making super quick decisions in the post, that's really from later in his career. That wasn't there from the beginning.

I think Jordan's passing ability is slightly underrated, but the problem is it wasn't really what he was looking to do. It's not like he averaged 3 assists, but he COULD have had more if that's what he was looking to do. Can't really give him credit for what he hypothetically could do, but didn't.

There's one * though. the NBA was pretty weak defensively until the very late 80's-early 90's.

Jordan is a depth at every facet of baseketball offesively. Bird was definately better at some parts of offense. But there wasnt anything Jordan coukdnt do. Bird coukd not put the ball on the floor and score off the dribble. Thats the difference.

[DatAsh]

The point is: Jordan could have easily had much better opponents than he did have. Had he had much better opponents, he would not have 6 rings. He would have 2 or 3. Maybe just 1. He would not be any worse a player, but he sure wouldn't be labelled the GOAT by society with 1 ring alone. Not even with 2 or 3 rings.

To make a long story short: Circumstances.

Ok, I think I understand the point that you're making. Yes circumstances matter, but it's not as if Jordan was placed in any more favorable circumstances than guys like Magic, Bird, or Kobe; he actually had less favorable circumstances than those guys.

I think my confusion stemmed from the unrealistic caliber of the teams you guys were making, while at the same time making a point of "equal" circumstances. Ya'll were basically taking teams that were talented enough to push the Bulls to the brink as is, and replacing their second best player with one of the best players ever.


Announcers were calling him the greatest by the late 80s, when he had 0 rings. Wilt and Hakeem are in 95% of peoples' top 10 lists even though they have 2 championships each.

Plus everybody could technically have had better competition.

I could be wrong, but I don't remember serious talk of Jordan being the best ever really starting until after the 1992' finals. Looking over some of my archives, it would seem as if that's the case as well.

There were mentions of it here and there, but it wasn't widespread.


It was after 1992, the Olympics and the Dream Team in Barcelona when he started to become a worldwide icon.


That jives with my memory as well.


Peak Bird and peak Shaq were no worse than peak Jordan.

I somewhat disagree with this, I'd say peak Bird was a tiny step below, and peak Shaq was a tiny step above peak Jordan. A lot of that comes down to opinion though.


Jordan was a better defensive player (though he is nowhere near the best perimeter defender of all time, but he is good).

This statement just comes across as biased, sorry :(. I think you could make a reasonable case for him anywhere in that 2-8 range, but saying "nowhere near" just comes across as bias.



Bird was a better offensive player though. He (Bird) was more efficient, not only with his shot but with his allaround offensive numbers. And he was a much better passer and playmaker.

Magic, Bird, and Jordan are my top three offensive players ever, in that order. :cheers:

[DatAsh]

Bird coukd not put the ball on the floor and score off the dribble. Thats the difference.

Jordan couldn't make the kinds of passes that Bird routinely made to get his teammates clear looks at the basket.

[elementally morale]

No, Those numbers are real head to head for every game they played against each other. Now your talking about just the 95 finals, where Hakeems numbers were better.

I was talking about the 95 Finals, so may be right about the rest. I honestly don't know and I almost never make my judgement based on stats. You can argue prime Hakeem and prime Shaq either way. Peak Shaq was better than peak Hakeem but peak Shaq was better than anybody since 1980.

[elementally morale]

Jordan couldn't make the kinds of passes that Bird routinely made to get his teammates clear looks at the basket.

Magic was even more insane. He seems to have been running close to full-speed 80% of the time... yoiu think he is going to lose the bell... what the hell is this cat doing... and then, all of a sudden the ball is passed to a guy you didn't even see was on the court.

[ZeN]

Jordan, Moses, Oscar.

Baylor is the most under.
Naw Jerry West is the ultimate underrated player.

[wakencdukest]

I was talking about the 95 Finals, so may be right about the rest. I honestly don't know and I almost never make my judgement based on stats. You can argue prime Hakeem and prime Shaq either way. Peak Shaq was better than peak Hakeem but peak Shaq was better than anybody since 1980.


I don't either, I judge players from what I see when they played. I won't even comment on players before 1978 or so, because I don't think seeing limited footage and looking up their stats qualifies me to make that judgement. But sometimes to make a point with some of these stat guys you have to. That's what cracks me up about some of the younger guys here that have such strong opinions about players from before their time.

[97 bulls]

Jordan couldn't make the kinds of passes that Bird routinely made to get his teammates clear looks at the basket.
OK. But he was at worst a solid passer. Bird could not break a guy off the dribble.

This is what makes Jordan the best ever. He may not have been great at everything, but he was solid to great at every aspect of basketball.

[DonDadda59]

1. one bad play in a million? ill still take pippen

That's as egregious an offense as there is in sports. A supposed 'leader' quitting on his team, in crunch time, in the playoffs because he was pouting about the coach not drawing up a play for him? That's completely unforgivable. Pippen was a perfect complementary player but as Steve Kerr said: "I don't know what got into Pippen. He is such a great teammate and maybe the pressure was getting to him and he just could not take it anymore"

Not everyone is built for moments like that.


2. pippen was a top dog with jordan. pippen led a JORDANLESS bulls to 55 wins and almost a finals appearance. jordan wasnt even REPLACED.. if they had a suitable REPLACEMENT pippen wouldve won a chip,

The Bulls added Toni Kukoc and Steve Kerr, two guys who were key to their second Jordan-led threepeat. The next season they were barely hovering over .500 when Jordan came back after nearly 2 years off and dragged them into the playoffs. Then when he had a full offseason to get back into game shape all he did was lead the Bulls to the best record ever and a second threepeat.

So basically in Jordan's absence, Pippen had one great year and one terrible year where the Bulls were saved from missing the playoffs only by a rusty Jordan coming back to close out the last 17 games (Bulls went 13-4 with his return). Now look at the '98 season where Pippen missed the first 35 games due to a back injury- Bulls went 24-11, Jordan won MVP, won finals MVP.




pippen was 12 minutes away from a chip with the blazers until kobe/shaq took over. .. he was also the top dog /playmaker on that Blazers squad.

And if he was a clutch player, he wouldn't have been a spectator and let that lead slip away. How many times in the playoffs did the Bulls lose a huge lead in an important game like that with Jordan leading them?


jordan never sniffed a championship without pippen (didnt make playoffs on wizards either).. pippen came close twice.


Pippen joined up with Hakeem and Barkley the season after Jordan carried him to yet another championship. He was the third option and accomplished nothing. He then went to the Blazers and as you pointed out, stood idly by while real superstars and leaders did what was necessary to win the championship.

After that major chokejob, the Blazers fizzled out and accomplished nothing. Not that Pippen was even the man on those teams, that was very clearly Mr. Rasheed Wallace.

Now why would you expect a 38-40 year old Jordan with Jahidi White as his starting center to make the playoffs with that abysmal Wizards lineup? Give a 33 year old MJ Barkley and Hakeem and you're talking about another championship. He damn sure wouldn't have been a third option on a first round exit team or a 3rd-4th option on those Blazers squads.

Hell Dwyane Wade would've have as well, and Pippen is supposedly better than that guy? Let's not even bring Lebron into this :oldlol:

[DatAsh]

Magic was even more insane. He seems to have been running close to full-speed 80% of the time... yoiu think he is going to lose the bell... what the hell is this cat doing... and then, all of a sudden the ball is passed to a guy you didn't even see was on the court.

Magic was incredible; best offensive player ever - and by a decent margin - in my opinion.

look at the offensive ratings of his teams over the years



1980 - 1st
1981 - 7th --- Magic misses 45 games
1982 - 2nd
1983 - 1st
1984 - 5th --- Magic misses 15 games
1985 - 1st
1986 - 1st
1987 - 1st
1988 - 2nd
1989 - 1st
1990 - 1st
1991 - 5th
1992 - 13th --- Magic retired


He did have a lot of help, but his impact on that side of the ball is undeniable.

[elementally morale]

I don't either, I judge players from what I see when they played. I won't even comment on players before 1978 or so, because I don't think seeing limited footage and looking up their stats qualifies me to make that judgement. But sometimes to make a point with some of these stat guys you have to. That's what cracks me up about some of the younger guys here that have such strong opinions about players from before their time.

When we are young we have strong opinions on everything. :oldlol:

[Carbine]

Jordan was a better defensive player (though he is nowhere near the best perimeter defender of all time, but he is good). Bird was a better offensive player though. He (Bird) was more efficient, not only with his shot but with his allaround offensive numbers. And he was a much better passer and playmaker.

I know it's unheard of if someone says he saw better (as in: more efficient, more effective) offensive players than Jordan, but I saw at least two: peak Bird and peak Shaq. Neither of these players I really like btw, so by no means I want to prop either of them. It's just the 'truth', at least in my perception.

It doesn't matter if Bird had a better outside shot, the only thing that matters is impact. Jordan dominated with what he had, he didn't need to be prolific from outside.

I'm not fully understanding the more efficient thing either. Peak Bird for efficient is at 60.8 total shooting percentage and .555 eFG% scoring 28 points per game.

Peak Jordan for efficient is at 61.4 total shooting percentage and .546 eFG% doing 32.5 points.

So Jordan was just as efficient for all intents and purposes and scored 4.5 more points per game doing so.

I'm confused? :confusedshrug:

[DatAsh]

OK. But he was at worst a solid passer. Bird could not break a guy off the dribble.


I get that, but you just listed one thing Jordan does better than Bird and said "That's the difference" as if that somehow made him a better offensive player on its own merit. My point was that you could just as easily do the exact same thing for Bird, albeit with a different arbitrarily chosen skill.

There's far too many differences between the two players to try and determine the better overall offensive player based on one skill alone . No matter the skill you choose, your being unfair to one player or the other.


This is what makes Jordan the best ever. He may not have been great at everything, but he was solid to great at every aspect of basketball.
In terms of having the weakest weaknesses, Jordan would get my vote as the most complete player ever, so I don't disagree with you there.

[DonDadda59]

The point is: Jordan could have easily had much better opponents than he did have. Had he had much better opponents, he would not have 6 rings. He would have 2 or 3. Maybe just 1. He would not be any worse a player, but he sure wouldn't be labelled the GOAT by society with 1 ring alone. Not even with 2 or 3 rings.

To make a long story short: Circumstances.

Jordan played in an era that had the most skilled and outright dominant big men of any era... and he was the best player of his generation... as a perimeter player who never had a dominant big to play with. Just look at how the league looked when he retired the first time.

94- Hakeem won MVP, David Robinson won the scoring title, Hakeem vs Ewing in the finals.

95- Robinson won MVP, Shaq won the scoring title, Hakeem vs Shaq in the finals.

This was in a time where the league wasn't geared towards perimeter stars, it was very clearly a big man's league and Jordan absolutely dominated all of them. It took him leaving for 2 seasons for them to accomplish anything.

You can point to any team/player as you and your accomplice fallaciously did here and say 'oh, yeah he/they were great but it would've been different if players from different eras somehow magically transported to their era'.

But the truth is, that's impossible and the facts remain the same.

[DatAsh]

I'm not fully understanding the more efficient thing either. Peak Bird for efficient is at 60.8 total shooting percentage and .555 eFG% scoring 28 points per game.

Peak Jordan for efficient is at 61.4 total shooting percentage and .546 eFG% doing 32.5 points.

So Jordan was just as efficient for all intents and purposes and scored 4.5 more points per game doing so.

I'm confused? :confusedshrug:

I think he was referring to all around offensive efficiency. Jordan was the more efficient scorer, but Bird was one of the best passers to ever play the game.

[Micku]

Jordan is a depth at every facet of baseketball offesively. Bird was definately better at some parts of offense. But there wasnt anything Jordan coukdnt do. Bird coukd not put the ball on the floor and score off the dribble. Thats the difference.

He could, just not as efficient, and it was a bit awkward.

He did score more with post ups or catch and shoot. But there were a few times where he did score off the dribble or he walked the ball up the court.

And to NumberSix, Jordan was equal or better than D.Wade at the midrange game in his early years. Probably not the 08-09 Wade or current Wade.

To the OP:

Hmm...Well, a lot of guys pump up Jordan a little bit too much, so he is a bit overrated in some aspects. But ppl were calling him GOAT and pumping him up since the late 80s.

My guess would be John Stockton. He didn't seem to be considered better than Penny, Payton or Tim Hardaway when he played. But I think if you ask anybody now, they would take Stockton. I don't know if he was just that underrated or guys overrate him when he retired.

[elementally morale]

To several posters: I have no problem with anyone claiming Jordan was the best player ever. I'm a bit at odds when I see some young people claiming nobody else was even near him ever, and I'm almost sure said poster started watching the game 3 years ago and even prime Shaq is history to him.

[DonDadda59]

To several posters: I have no problem with anyone claiming Jordan was the best player ever. I'm a bit at odds when I see some young people claiming nobody else was even near him ever, and I'm almost sure said poster started watching the game 3 years ago and even prime Shaq is history to him.

Yeah, that's nice and all but saying "hey Jordan wouldn't be considered GOAT if Wilt Chamberlain played on the Jazz or prime Shaq on Phoenix" is a completely fallacious and nonsensical argument... especially considering Jordan's Bulls swept Shaq and co. when they were at full strength :oldlol:

But good try though :cheers:

[tpols]

Ok, I think I understand the point that you're making. Yes circumstances matter, but it's not as if Jordan was placed in any more favorable circumstances than guys like Magic, Bird, or Kobe; he actually had less favorable circumstances than those guys.
Ok. . Maybe I should've taken Clyde off of portland instead of porter. But is Clyde really that much better than pippen? Anyways, the point I was trying to make was to give the other GOAT candidates teams in Jordans era that would have similar supporting casts to him.

MJ had scottie, kukoc, Rodman, grant, armstrong, Kerr and a bunch of other guys in his prime.

I'm saying you give Bird a mid 90s Ewing and role players, Kareem Stockton, Wilt Mullin and spree, and magic I guess, now, Terry porter.

And anyone of those guys could lead their squads past the Bulls. Jordan wouldn't dominate Birds team because Bird, despite being less individually dominant, makes his teammates better than MJ makes his, which would balance it out. Same thing with Magic.

And I believe Wilt and Kareem could have as big an overall impact on the court as MJ could, if anything because the Bulls had no big men to stop them.

[Legends66NBA7]

To several posters: I have no problem with anyone claiming Jordan was the best player ever. I'm a bit at odds when I see some young people claiming nobody else was even near him ever, and I'm almost sure said poster started watching the game 3 years ago and even prime Shaq is history to him.

I agree with this. I usually disregard a certain quote that is used often... somewhere along the lines off:

"Even people who don't watch basketball or play it... know who Michael Jordan is !".

[comerb]

Shaq

Does anybody else find it ironic that he's only considered the "MDE" for the 3 years of his career where he played with another top 10 GOAT?

His Orlando teams were stacked, got swept by Hakkeem in the finals.

His Lakers teams didn't go anywhere until Kobe developed into a top 5 player in the league

Dude played with 3 of the best guards in his era. 1 top 10 GOAT 1 top 25 GOAT.

Great player, but the "MDE" thing gets tossed around way to much, you're not really the "MDE" when you couldn't get it done with Penny, got swept by a Hakeem led Rockets team and only won championships when you had a top 2 player in the League playing beside you.

Dominant? yes, MDE? no

I hated Shaq. Still do.

But he isn't overrated. The dude was a ****ing beast.

[tpols]

The comparison had NOTHING to do with saying MJ had more help than other superstars.

It was to put all of the highest GOAT candidates on a hypothetical battlefield to fight against each other with equally talented teams.

[Legends66NBA7]

Yeah, that's nice and all but saying "hey Jordan wouldn't be considered GOAT if Wilt Chamberlain played on the Jazz or prime Shaq on Phoenix" is a completely fallacious and nonsensical argument... especially considering Jordan's Bulls swept Shaq and co. when they were at full strength :oldlol:

But good try though :cheers:

This is also true.

I'm confident in saying that even if ____ is considered GOAT, whoever is in the Top 3-5 etc... aren't far off or on his level. The hypothetical scenarios aren't necessary.

[comerb]

Magic, he was not a good defender and no one seems to hold him accountable for it when you start making top 10 lists. Meanwhile he's surrounded by guys that are good to great two way players.

[NumberSix]

Magic, he was not a good defender and no one seems to hold him accountable for it when you start making top 10 lists. Meanwhile he's surrounded by guys that are good to great two way players.
It wasn't a very strong defensive era most of his career.

What surprises me more is how nobody mentions how he was a mediocre shooter. Guess people just read stats and didn't actually see him play.

[DatAsh]

The comparison had NOTHING to do with saying MJ had more help than other superstars.

It was to put all of the highest GOAT candidates on a hypothetical battlefield to fight against each other with equally talented teams.

The reason your post took such heat was because you weren't really making equal teams.

With the Knicks, you took a team that was 95% as good as the Bulls to begin with, and replaced their second best player with a (generally accepted)top 6 player ever.

A team of Larry Bird, Patrick Ewing, Charles Oakley, Charles Smith, Anthony Mason, Doc Rivers, and Greg Anthony would probably beat the Bulls 8 times out of ten, but I don't think that is really indicative of whether or not Bird is a better player. They were a championship caliber 60 win team that pushed the Bulls to 6 games without Bird.

The Portland example was even worse, as they were seen by most at the time as the more stacked team to begin with. Taking their second best player and replacing him with a top 3 player ever just makes the comparison silly. Again, I'd take that team 9 times out of 10 over the Bulls in a 7 game series, but it has very little to do with whether or not Magic is a better player than Jordan.

I think I understand your point, but it was poorly executed.

[ILLsmak]

Olajuwon played 6 playoff games against the Spurs (prime Robinson + Rodman)

Olajuwon vs Spurs




Shaq played 30 playoff games against the Spurs.He scored 30+ points four times.

Shaq vs Spurs

lol, different teams?

-Smak

[jlip]

Yeah, that's nice and all but saying "hey Jordan wouldn't be considered GOAT if Wilt Chamberlain played on the Jazz or prime Shaq on Phoenix" is a completely fallacious and nonsensical argument... especially considering Jordan's Bulls swept Shaq and co. when they were at full strength :oldlol:

But good try though :cheers:

I don't particularly care about who the GOAT is, but who were you talking about was at "full strength?" Shaq's Magic and Jordan's Bulls only faced each other twice in the playoffs, and it is arguable that the team that lost each time was not at full strength. In '95 when the Bulls lost to the Magic the claim is that MJ was still "rusty", and there was no Rodman. In '96 when the Magic lost to the Bulls the claim was that Horace Grant (who was basically the MVP of the '95 series) was injured.

[Micku]

It wasn't a very strong defensive era most of his career.

What surprises me more is how nobody mentions how he was a mediocre shooter. Guess people just read stats and didn't actually see him play.

No he wasn't later in his career. Starting from 1984ish he started to make those shots. He picked his spots very well and knocks them down more often than not. Many teams make the mistake of leaving him open and he made them pay back then. In the late 80s, he was hitting 3s efficiently. 38%

Magic was ok defensively. He was a better help defender, same as Bird. They both were pretty good help defenders because of their height and length.

[jlip]

No he wasn't later in his career. Starting from 1984ish he started to make those shots. He picked his spots very well and knocks them down more often than not. Many teams make the mistake of leaving him open and he made them pay back then. By 1987, you don't leave him open. In the late 80s, he was hitting 3s efficiently. 38%

Magic was ok defensively. He was a better help defender, same as Bird. They both were pretty good help defenders because of their height and length.

Plus Magic was a pg. Offensively it was not his job to "shoot". It was his primary job to create easy shots for everyone else. His rather unique strength was actually his ability to completely dominate a game without having to shoot, despite yet being the 2nd highest scoring pg in NBA history.

[97 bulls]

The reason your post took such heat was because you weren't really making equal teams.

With the Knicks, you took a team that was 95% as good as the Bulls to begin with, and replaced their second best player with a (generally accepted)top 6 player ever.

A team of Larry Bird, Patrick Ewing, Charles Oakley, Charles Smith, Anthony Mason, Doc Rivers, and Greg Anthony would probably beat the Bulls 8 times out of ten, but I don't think that is really indicative of whether or not Bird is a better player. They were a championship caliber 60 win team that pushed the Bulls to 6 games without Bird.

The Portland example was even worse, as they were seen by most at the time aYys the more stacked team to begin with. Taking their second best player and replacing him with a top 3 player ever just makes the comparison silly. Again, I'd take that team 9 times out of 10 over the Bulls in a 7 game series, but it has very little to do with whether or not Magic is a better player than Jordan.

I think I understand your point, but it was poorly executed.
i understand your reasoning, but consider this. The Knicks never beat the Bulls with Jordan. And needed seven game, home court advantage, and a bad call to beat them without Jordan.

Then based on youre scenario, you take away Wilkins and Starks. The only two players the Knicks had that they felt had a chance against Jordan. I think at best the Knicks beat the Bulls a 4 out of 10 times under youre Bird scenario.

[DatAsh]

i understand your reasoning, but consider this. The Knicks never beat the Bulls with Jordan. And needed seven game, home court advantage, and a bad call to beat them without Jordan.

Then based on youre scenario, you take away Wilkins and Starks. The only two players the Knicks had that they felt had a chance against Jordan. I think at best the Knicks beat the Bulls a 4 out of 10 times under youre Bird scenario.

They took the Bulls, with Jordan, to 6 games. I'd be willing to bet that subbing Bird for Starks would push them pretty comfortably over the edge.

[97 bulls]

They took the Bulls, with Jordan, to 6 games. I'd be willing to bet that subbing Bird for Starks would push them pretty comfortably over the edge.
Did you even ponder my post Ash? The Knicks barely beat the Bulls without Jordan. And never beat them with Jordan. Now I understand adding Bird woukd be a huge upgrade in talent. But whos gonna defend Jordan? Greg Anthony? Not all that glitters is gold bro. Basketbal is about matchups.

[tpols]

Did you even ponder my post Ash? The Knicks barely beat the Bulls without Jordan. And never beat them with Jordan. Now I understand adding Bird woukd be a huge upgrade in talent. But whos gonna defend Jordan? Greg Anthony? Not all that glitters is gold bro. Basketbal is about matchups.
That's what I was initially thinking..

The Scottie Pippen led bulls were dead even with the Ewing led knicks. 7 games down to the wire.

So you throw Michael on one side and Larry on the other..

[DatAsh]

Did you even ponder my post Ash? The Knicks barely beat the Bulls without Jordan. And never beat them with Jordan. Now I understand adding Bird woukd be a huge upgrade in talent. But whos gonna defend Jordan? Greg Anthony? Not all that glitters is gold bro. Basketbal is about matchups.

I don't see them having any more trouble than any other playoff team defending Jordan. That team was one of the best defensive teams ever, and losing Starks isn't going to change that all that much. Defending Jordan has to be a team effort, no one player does it alone.

[gengiskhan]

Before Retirement:

Kobe so far.

[97 bulls]

I don't see them having any more trouble than any other playoff team defending Jordan. That team was one of the best defensive teams ever, and losing Starks isn't going to change that all that much. Defending Jordan has to be a team effort, no one player does it alone.
Its most definitely a team effort. But it has to start somewhere. You must have someone capabke of at least having some semblance of man defense on Jordan.

Id like youre scenario much better if the Knicks keep Starks or Wilkins (preferably Wilkins) and replace Charles Smith with Bird. And even still I think itd be close. But with the edge going to the Knicks

[KOBE143]

Shaquille O'neal - people call him the most dominant ever but most of those people forget he was swept 8 times in the PO and he always had great guard to bailed his ass in those championship years he won.. You know those were not just ordinary guard, one of them has a case to be the GOAT, the other one is arguably a top 5 sg of all time.. In the other team he didnt won a championship, he also had great guard as teammates.. In Orlando he had Penny hardaway the 2nd best guard of his era only behind the great Michael Jordan.. In phoenix Steve Nash a 2 times MVP, arguably a top 5 pg of all time.. In Boston Rajon Rondo, Ray Allen.. In Cleveland, LeBron James the only non guard in the list but also played pg in his early career in Cleveland.. All of them were in their primes when he Shaq teamed up with them maybe with the exception of Ray Allen.. Yeah, the most dominant my ass..

Michael Jordan - perennial 1st round loser without Pippen and the sad part is, he got swept in all those 1st round exit.. Cant win a championship without Pippen the best perimeter defender of all time, a top 20 player of all time and could've been a top 10 easily if only he had his own team.. MJ retired in 1993 but his team was still one of the best in the league and one call away from making the finals and would've a legitimate chance of winning the championship that year if not for the bad officiating.. Imagine the bulls winning the championship that year without Mike.. It would've been a big dagger in Mike legacy..

[NumberSix]

Shaquille O'neal - people call him the most dominant ever but most of those people forget he was swept 8 times in the PO and he always had great guard to bailed his ass in those championship years he won.. You know those were not just ordinary guard, one of them has a case to be the GOAT, the other one is arguably a top 5 sg of all time.. In the other team he didnt won a championship, he also had great guard as teammates.. In Orlando he had Penny hardaway the 2nd best guard of his era only behind the great Michael Jordan.. In phoenix Steve Nash a 2 times MVP, arguably a top 5 pg of all time.. In Boston Rajon Rondo, Ray Allen.. In Cleveland, LeBron James the only non guard in the list but also played pg in his early career in Cleveland.. All of them were in their primes when he Shaq teamed up with them maybe with the exception of Ray Allen.. Yeah, the most dominant my ass..

Michael Jordan - perennial 1st round loser without Pippen and the sad part is, he got swept in all those 1st round exit.. Cant win a championship without Pippen the best perimeter defender of all time, a top 20 player of all time and could've been a top 10 easily if only he had his own team.. MJ retired in 1993 but his team was still one of the best in the league and one call away from making the finals and would've a legitimate chance of winning the championship that year if not for the bad officiating.. Imagine the bulls winning the championship that year without Mike.. It would've been a big dagger in Mike legacy..
Shaq > Kobe. Live with it phaggit.

[RobertdeMeijer]

Kevin McHale perhaps. Always very good, yes, but I hear arguments that make him seem better than he really was:

- Best PF of the 80s
- Best post game ever
- Scored 26ppg once, and would have done that every year if he wasn't surrounded by so much talent and/or if he didn't kill his foot in the 1987 Playoffs
- Excellent defender
- Great glue guy / perfect second fiddle


And even those these are all good arguments, when people talk about him, he sounds like he was as good as Tim Duncan, but only had less minutes. And that's simply not how well he was admired during the 80s. It was always Larry's team (heck, they even went down to 42 wins when Bird got injured). Maybe he was living in his shadow (McHale rarely got MVP votes). Maybe McHale really is as good as he is on paper (btw, during his prime he was around .200 ws/48; as good as Kobe Bryant).
But I just don't recall hearing that much acclaim about him while I was growing up. Perhaps he's not overrated, but I feel like his status has gained a lot since.

[KOBE143]

Shaq > Kobe. Live with it phaggit.
I never mention Kobe in my post you stupid wannabe lakers fan.. :facepalm

[Djahjaga]

Shaq

Does anybody else find it ironic that he's only considered the "MDE" for the 3 years of his career where he played with another top 10 GOAT?

His Orlando teams were stacked, got swept by Hakkeem in the finals.

His Lakers teams didn't go anywhere until Kobe developed into a top 5 player in the league

Dude played with 3 of the best guards in his era. 1 top 10 GOAT 1 top 25 GOAT.

Great player, but the "MDE" thing gets tossed around way to much, you're not really the "MDE" when you couldn't get it done with Penny, got swept by a Hakeem led Rockets team and only won championships when you had a top 2 player in the League playing beside you.

Dominant? yes, MDE? no

Kobe wasn't top-10 in 2000-2002. He had some great playoff series, particularly that last run, but he wasn't displaying anything top-10 in nature. Shaq was. He was phenomenal in those three runs.

[kNicKz]

To a degree, Michael Jordan. Some people act like he was the best ever at every aspect of the game, never missed a big shot.
:facepalm stop

[j3lademaster]

It's fine to have him at the top spot.. He actually has the best case of anyone. But people literally scoff at you if you say someone else is better. If you put..

Larry Bird on the Knicks(instead of starks)
Magic on Portland(instead of porter)
Wilt on the Warriors(instead of webber)
Kareem on the Jazz(instead of malone)

In the 90s with equal teams Is MJ going to lead the Bulls past all of them every year? There's probably a different champion every year.So if you put all-time greats who had their primes in several different eras and put them all in one league there would be more parity? Interesting....

[longhornfan1234]

Magic. Bird was clearly better than Magic during his prime. Magic didn't become a better player 'til Bird had back problems. Bird's supporting cast was weaker than Magic's.

[Mr. I'm So Rad]

Kobe wasn't top-10 in 2000-2002. He had some great playoff series, particularly that last run, but he wasn't displaying anything top-10 in nature. Shaq was. He was phenomenal in those three runs.

Maybe he wasn't Top 10 in 2000 (Top 12-15 at worst), but he wasn't Top 10 in 2001 and in 2002? You smokin that good shit son.

2001: 28/6/5 Regular Season ; 29/7/6 Postseason ; Lakers almost swept the playoffs
2002: 25/5/5 Regular Season ; 26/6/4 Postseason + clutch performances throughout the playoffs especially in the series against the Spurs

In what world do these things not equate to someone being a Top 10 player?

[TheMan]

Jordan played in an era that had the most skilled and outright dominant big men of any era... and he was the best player of his generation... as a perimeter player who never had a dominant big to play with. Just look at how the league looked when he retired the first time.

94- Hakeem won MVP, David Robinson won the scoring title, Hakeem vs Ewing in the finals.

95- Robinson won MVP, Shaq won the scoring title, Hakeem vs Shaq in the finals.

This was in a time where the league wasn't geared towards perimeter stars, it was very clearly a big man's league and Jordan absolutely dominated all of them. It took him leaving for 2 seasons for them to accomplish anything.

You can point to any team/player as you and your accomplice fallaciously did here and say 'oh, yeah he/they were great but it would've been different if players from different eras somehow magically transported to their era'.

But the truth is, that's impossible and the facts remain the same.
:applause:

[comerb]

No he wasn't later in his career. Starting from 1984ish he started to make those shots. He picked his spots very well and knocks them down more often than not. Many teams make the mistake of leaving him open and he made them pay back then. In the late 80s, he was hitting 3s efficiently. 38%

Magic was ok defensively. He was a better help defender, same as Bird. They both were pretty good help defenders because of their height and length.


Can you imagine him guarding the PGs of this era? He'd be a liability, they're just too fast and dangerous. He wouldn't be able to play as a pure PG in this era, he'd have to play as a forward defensively.

Which isn't that big of a deal assuming they had the personal, Lebron generally guards Forwards and SGs, but he is capable of defending the smaller guys at a near elite level. Anyway, I do think it says something about how Magic is a bit overrated.

[TheMarkMadsen]

I should be green by the playoffs


:roll:

[secund2nun]

Reggie Miller.

Jordan (We have people predicting he would average 40 ppg today and that he is the best player ever in every single category of basketball).

Penny Hardaway is the most overrated by miles since he retired though.

[MiseryCityTexas]

He is a very good candidate, but overrating him started while he still played. It started at around 1996-1997. He is constantly overrated since then. I'm not saying he wasn't the best player of all time, but people are pretending as if he is in a league of his own which is untrue.


72-10 is a league of it's own idiot.

[Micku]

Can you imagine him guarding the PGs of this era? He'd be a liability, they're just too fast and dangerous. He wouldn't be able to play as a pure PG in this era, he'd have to play as a forward defensively.

Which isn't that big of a deal assuming they had the personal, Lebron generally guards Forwards and SGs, but he is capable of defending the smaller guys at a near elite level. Anyway, I do think it says something about how Magic is a bit overrated.

He did that in the 80s. He never guarded PGs back then. You never see him guard John Stockton or Isiah Thomas in the 80s. That was Byron Scott's job. He was a good help defender because of his size and good at reading the passing lane.

[Greg Oden 50]

Reggie Miller.

Jordan (We have people predicting he would average 40 ppg today and that he is the best player ever in every single category of basketball).

Penny Hardaway is the most overrated by miles since he retired though.

JORDAN WOULD AVG 40 PPG AGAINST THIS SOFT & WEAK ERA,U MAD

JORDAN WILL AVG 20FTA WITH TODAY RULES :applause:

[BoutPractice]

Conversely, there are players I thought would get a well deserved post-retirement bump, but haven't for some reason.
Shaq, to start with... I believed that due to his status as the most dominant player in his era, the stories from those who watched him play at the time would elevate him to the top 5. I think Kobe's success has prevented that somewhat.
Webber and Stojakovic as well. They're hardly ever mentioned nowadays, but they were both really, really good.
And then there's David Robinson, but I'm seeing more and more people say he was underrated so the story's starting to change.

As for players who are likely to get a good post-retirement bump, I would nominate Chauncey Billups and Paul Pierce. Classic examples of "unsexy" players but whose career actually look great on paper AND who happened to be around for plenty of historic moments. They won't necessarily be too high on people's GOAT lists, which don't really matter anyway, but they'll be remembered. I can also see a legend developing around Rajon Rodo as a bigtime playoff performer and Metta World Peace as the most memorable "character" from his era.

[Doranku]

He is defensively, but he was a pretty average offensive player.

How can Pippen be overrated when people say things like this? This is just as bad as saying Pippen=LeBron.

[TheBigVeto]

Easy and the only correct answer: Magic Johnson.
/thread

[Grey Dawn]

Jalen Rose

[knicksman]

The Magic/Bird thing is really weird.

When they were playing it was pretty universally agreed that Bird was the best player in the NBA. After they retired, now you pretty much NEVER see Bird ranked ahead of magic.

because only idiots think that statpadders are more impactful than pure pgs or pure scorers. Its the same idiots who ranks oscar as top 10 all time.

[knicksman]

oscar obviously. The guy is considered top 10 without a ring. LOL

[La Frescobaldi]

oscar obviously. The guy is considered top 10 without a ring. LOL
The Big O won a championship.

[julizaver]

I don't understand why some people said that Magic was the most overrated. Obviously they did not see him play. He was such an unique player. The most overrated player should be Bill Walton. And it is only because of injuries. He had great college career, had all the talent, but in his NBA career he was injured half his career and had only 2 or 3 good seasons (and they were also cut by injuries). I like him and his unselfish style of play anyway.

[knicksman]

The Big O won a championship.

not as the man

[knicksman]

I don't understand why some people said that Magic was the most overrated. Obviously they did not see him play. He was such an unique player. The most overrated player should be Bill Walton. And it is only because of injuries. He had great college career, had all the talent, but in his NBA career he was injured half his career and had only 2 or 3 good seasons (and they were also cut by injuries). I like him and his unselfish style of play anyway.

because lebron fanboys cant accept the fact that a lesser player to bird has more rings than a player who plays like lebron. In fact I consider bird to be one of the most overrated coz he only won once in his prime where he had better stats. The first 2 rings was when he wasnt posting superstar numbers yet. They just really dont want lebron to be exposed just like oscar so they defend players who plays like him.

[El Kabong]

Jalen Rose
Who overrates him? He was a good scorer on crappy teams, that's about it.

[TheMan]

Reggie Miller.

Jordan (We have people predicting he would average 40 ppg today and that he is the best player ever in every single category of basketball).

Penny Hardaway is the most overrated by miles since he retired though.
Actually, Phil Jackson said something to that effect, along with a few other former NBA players and coaches...

The hand check rule has favored the perimeter game
http://m.bleacherreport.com/articles/833257-michael-jordan-could-he-really-score-50-with-the-hand-check-rules-in-place/page/15

[julizaver]

Actually, Phil Jackson said something to that effect, along with a few other former NBA players and coaches...

The hand check rule has favored the perimeter game
http://m.bleacherreport.com/articles/833257-michael-jordan-could-he-really-score-50-with-the-hand-check-rules-in-place/page/15

MJ could score 40 ppg, but depending on the team he played - I mean that he as a player could but it is not clear how it will reflect to his team. If he is in a team with consistent second scorer his numbers will be similar to the ones he had when playing.

[ThaRegul8r]

The Big O won a championship.

not as the man

Big O Caps Sweep

[I]BALTIMORE (AP)

[NumberSix]

I don't understand why some people said that Magic was the most overrated. Obviously they did not see him play. He was such an unique player. The most overrated player should be Bill Walton. And it is only because of injuries. He had great college career, had all the talent, but in his NBA career he was injured half his career and had only 2 or 3 good seasons (and they were also cut by injuries). I like him and his unselfish style of play anyway.
Overrated doesn't mean bad.

[TheBigVeto]

not as the man

neither did Kobe.

[guy]

It's fine to have him at the top spot.. He actually has the best case of anyone. But people literally scoff at you if you say someone else is better. If you put..

Larry Bird on the Knicks(instead of starks)
Magic on Portland(instead of porter)
Wilt on the Warriors(instead of webber)
Kareem on the Jazz(instead of malone)

In the 90s with equal teams Is MJ going to lead the Bulls past all of them every year? There's probably a different champion every year.

Arguably all of those, definitely the first two, aren't equal teams. And even then, I'd give the bulls a decent shot to still win 6.

[jlip]

The Magic over Bird sentiments began to take root before Magic retired. It is indeed true that Bird was considered better over the first half of their respective careers, but the '87 Finals combined with Bird's injuries and Magic's continued success caused people's opinions to shift. So this is not a case of getting overrated "since" retirement.

[ThaRegul8r]

The Magic over Bird sentiments began to take root before Magic retired. It is indeed true that Bird was considered better over the first half of their respective careers, but the '87 Finals combined with Bird's injuries and Magic's continued success caused people's opinions to shift. So this is not a case of getting overrated "since" retirement.

There was GOAT talk for Magic while he was playing, which I've posted on here before. So either they weren't following basketball at the time, weren't following what was going on past their favorite player/team, or they don't remember it.