Are these players good enough to be best player on dynasty? (3+ rings)

[3ball]

Karl Malone
Alonzo Mourning
John Stockton

[aj1987]

Karl Malone
Alonzo Mourning
John Stockton
Dude, why do you even ask these questions? You're gonna bring up LeBron and MJ in the very next post anyways.

[kennethgriffin]

malone
wade
bosh
allen
east
crap era
everyone in nba injured
team mate bail out shots
half seasons
free trip to finals

alonzo
wade
bosh
allen
east
crap era
everyone in nba injured
team mate bail out shots
half seasons
free trip to finals

stockton
wade
bosh
allen
east
crap era
everyone in nba injured
team mate bail out shots
half seasons
free trip to finals


yup

[kennethgriffin]

Dude, why do you even ask these questions? You're gonna bring up LeBron and MJ in the very next post anyways.




http://i.imgur.com/JW9lbp4.gif

[sdot_thadon]

Karl Malone
Alonzo Mourning
John Stockton
I'll bite, yes to all 3. Given the roster around him is properly put together a d balanced why not?

[kennethgriffin]

I'll bite, yes to all 3. Given lebrons roster around him is properly put together luck and handouts, why not?




http://static4.fjcdn.com/thumbnails/comments/One+of+the+best+movies+_0cdf5679b86147923661d0aca1 7a5ea6.gif

[SouBeachTalents]

Considering there have been only a handful of dynasties, and they all featured a top 10 player of all time on them, I'd say no

[sdot_thadon]

I'll bite, yes to all 3. Given the most dominant bigman of all time and goat coach why not?
Fixed.

http://static4.fjcdn.com/thumbnails/comments/One+of+the+best+movies+_0cdf5679b86147923661d0aca1 7a5ea6.gif

[3ball]

Considering there have been only a handful of dynasties, and they all featured a top 10 player of all time on them, I'd say no


ding ding ding ding ding ding ding ding

tell him what he's won bob!

the fact that they aren't good enough to be the best player on a dynasty (3+ rings) proves Alonzo, Malone, and Stockton aren't anywhere NEAR as good as MJ, despite having higher RAPM in 1998 (based on some amateur's back of the envelope calculations):

http://ascreamingcomesacrossthecourt.blogspot.com/2013/12/1997-98-rapm-non-prior-informed.html?m=1

This is why rapm is garbage when comparing atg's (and garbage for player comparisons period - rapm is only useful to gain insight into various team lineups

i mean, rapm says stockton > mj... when stockton had malone and couldn't do shit... mj had only pippen and 3-peat from 1991-1993... then another one
.

[RRR3]

Kenneth, don't make me ether you again.

[AintNoSunshine]

LMFAO Morning? Stockton? :roll: :roll: Malone wasnt able to win one let alone three, and he already had an all time great PG running PnR with him

[sdot_thadon]

Honestly dynasties have as much to do with the roster surrounding the players as the players themselves. Malone never really had a reliable 2nd scorer, say a scottie pippen. Stockton was there but he was very disciplined with his role. I believe he could have been a bigger offensive threat but Sloan's structure seemed to be most important on those teams. Zo was a good borderline great 2 way guy, again a great running mate would have done him wonders as well. Who did he have that's as good as a pippen, mchale, or worthy?

[3ball]

Honestly dynasties have as much to do with the roster surrounding the players as the players themselves. Malone never really had a reliable 2nd scorer, say a scottie pippen. Stockton was there but he was very disciplined with his role. I believe he could have been a bigger offensive threat but Sloan's structure seemed to be most important on those teams. Zo was a good borderline great 2 way guy, again a great running mate would have done him wonders as well. Who did he have that's as good as a pippen, mchale, or worthy?
the fact that Alonzo, Malone and Stockton weren't good enough to be the best player on a dynasty (3+ rings) proves that Alonzo, Malone, and Stockton aren't anywhere NEAR as good as MJ, despite having higher RAPM in 1998 (based on some amateur's back of the envelope calculations):

http://ascreamingcomesacrossthecourt.blogspot.com/2013/12/1997-98-rapm-non-prior-informed.html?m=1

This is why rapm is garbage when comparing atg's (and garbage for player comparisons period - rapm is only useful to gain insight into various team lineups

i mean, rapm says stockton > mj... when stockton had malone and couldn't do shit... mj had only pippen and 3-peat from 1991-1993... then another one

[sdot_thadon]

the fact that Alonzo, Malone and Stockton weren't good enough to be the best player on a dynasty (3+ rings) proves that Alonzo, Malone, and Stockton aren't anywhere NEAR as good as MJ, despite having higher RAPM in 1998 (based on some amateur's back of the envelope calculations):

http://ascreamingcomesacrossthecourt.blogspot.com/2013/12/1997-98-rapm-non-prior-informed.html?m=1

This is why rapm is garbage when comparing atg's (and garbage for player comparisons period - rapm is only useful to gain insight into various team lineups

i mean, rapm says stockton > mj... when stockton had malone and couldn't do shit... mj had only pippen and 3-peat from 1991-1993... then another one
Who cares, quit running from that other thread and go talk about game 5.

[Dr.J4ever]

Karl Malone
Alonzo Mourning
John Stockton

No...This is why MJ dominated that era.

Malone was overrated imo. Stockton was an all time great, but Mourning not so much.

Face it, MJ dominated a weaker era with no truly great teams. MJ is probably still the goat, but it doesn't mean it's a slam dunk(pardon the pun).

[superteamtheory]

No...This is why MJ dominated that era.

Malone was overrated imo. Stockton was an all time great, but Mourning not so much.

Face it, MJ dominated a weaker era with no truly great teams. MJ is probably still the goat, but it doesn't mean it's a slam dunk(pardon the pun).

Yo I bin sayin this! :cheers:

3Bull then tries to sell me on what a great team the Jazz were...
only to turnaround and throw them under the bus the next morning! :lol

My argument: Malone very great, Stockton great, together with proper supporting pieces (Hornycek, Sloan as coach etc.) definitely a great maybe even very great team for their few years there...
But MJ ...
great-est. ... plus has great Pippen and Rodman to counter impact of Stock, his own additional depth pieces like Kukoc, one of the top 5 coaches, a more experienced roster to threepeat with...
I don't see why anybody would pick the Jazz on paper unless just to try to be / hopefor something different..

Or maybe the old aging Bulls argument (look they had trouble beating Pacers!!), that one isn't too bad.. if you had amnesia about 97..

Spurs vs. Bulls in 99 tho, now that one would have been tougher to predict and maybe Bulls would have eventually finally collapsed.. but I'm honestly not sure they couldn't have won that too.. Not like it's the 2005, 2007, 2014 or 2016 Big 3 / Big 4 Spurs..

[3ball]

Who cares, quit running from that other thread and go talk about game 5.
done and done:

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11615091&postcount=53

[Mass Debator]

Yes.

Karl Malone
John Stockton
Bill Laimbeer
Joe Dumars
Dennis Rodman
Mark Aguirre
Vinnie, John...etc

[aj1987]

:facepalm

OP still doesn't realize that two of those dudes played together.

[ClipperRevival]

Yo I bin sayin this! :cheers:

3Bull then tries to sell me on what a great team the Jazz were...
only to turnaround and throw them under the bus the next morning! :lol

My argument: Malone very great, Stockton great, together with proper supporting pieces (Hornycek, Sloan as coach etc.) definitely a great maybe even very great team for their few years there...
But MJ ...
great-est. ... plus has great Pippen and Rodman to counter impact of Stock, his own additional depth pieces like Kukoc, one of the top 5 coaches, a more experienced roster to threepeat with...
I don't see why anybody would pick the Jazz on paper unless just to try to be / hopefor something different..

Or maybe the old aging Bulls argument (look they had trouble beating Pacers!!), that one isn't too bad.. if you had amnesia about 97..

Spurs vs. Bulls in 99 tho, now that one would have been tougher to predict and maybe Bulls would have eventually finally collapsed.. but I'm honestly not sure they couldn't have won that too.. Not like it's the 2005, 2007, 2014 or 2016 Big 3 / Big 4 Spurs..

Age was a huge factor for the Bulls in their 2nd 3 peat. MJ was 33, 34 and 35. Rodman was 35, 36 and 37. The only guy still close to his prime was Pippen.

Only because MJ did what he did, do we just accept that it wasn't spectacular. But it was. When's the last time a wing player was by far and away the best player in the world at age 33, 34 and 35? Umm, how about NEVER.

Remember Game 6 in 1998? Utah up 1 point, with possession with 30 seconds left? They hold on to score, they win and they push it to a game 7. Guess where game 7 is at? Not Chicago but Utah. I would say in a game 7, you would have to favor the home team. But MJ imposed his will in the last 30 seconds and didn't let it get to that point.

Hindsight is 20/20. Only because MJ did what he did, do we just accept it as normal or expected. PLEASE!

[RidonKs]

nooooo

not in any era i can think of except maybe the five years between 1978-83 and 2005-10 and each of them would have to be on a stacked squad

[smoovegittar]

Meh. Absence makes the heart grow fonder. 5 years from now, Kobe will be the second coming of Jesus around here. :rolleyes:

Those guys were all-stars, but role players.