Top 11-20 NBA Players of all time

[QUOTE=Alan Shore]i'll revise the list to accord with the poll:

1) jordan
1) russell
3)bird
3) magic
[B]5) duncan[/B]
5) shaq
7) olajuwon
8) robertson
[B]8) lebron james[/B]
[B]10) chamberlain[/B]
[B]10) abdul-jabbar[/B]
[B]12) bryant[/B]
13) havlicek
13) pippen
14) pettitt
14) rick barry
14) julius erving
16) dirk
16) barkley
18) stockton
19) moses malone
20) walt frazier

in my opinion it is impossible to tease apart some of these players which is why i have a good number of repeats.[/QUOTE]

LOL lebron d1ckriding at its finest. And LOL at the rest of the list. :roll: :roll:

I think you literally started watching basketball in July 2012.
:lol

[QUOTE=WillC]I think you should stop watching basketball. It's really not working out well for you.

LeBron James and others above Kareem Abdul-Jabbar?! Are you kidding me?

Pippen above Erving and Malone?!

Tim Duncan above Wilt Chamberlain?!

What a joke.[/QUOTE]


my criteria are:

making others around you better
BBIQ
positive-sum player
will
leadership
clutch, ability to focus

individual stats and media-based awards are not as important to me... no joke.

[QUOTE=Alan Shore]my criteria are:

making others around you better
BBIQ
positive-sum player
[B]will[/B]
leadership
[B]clutch, ability to focus[/B]

individual stats and media-based awards are not as important to me... no joke.[/QUOTE]

:lol
those would definitely drop your boy outta the top 20.

[QUOTE=Alan Shore]my criteria are:

making others around you better
BBIQ
positive-sum player
will
leadership
clutch,[U][B] ability to focus[/B][/U]

individual stats and media-based awards are not as important to me... no joke.[/QUOTE]


[IMG]http://www.miscupload.com/upload/482210517657332074775679.gif[/IMG]

[QUOTE=riseagainst]:lol
those would definitely drop your boy outta the top 20.[/QUOTE]


not a big fan of lebron james truth be told, but he seems to have, like dirk, taken a big step later in his career instead of emerging fully formed like several other top 10 players.

the criteria is not meant to be applicable across the board for each and every player but if the player possesses more than half of these criteria and in sufficient amount then he passes the test.

my hunch based on your attitude towards lbj is you are a big fan of bryant and there is nothing wrong with that.

[QUOTE=Alan Shore]not a big fan of lebron james truth be told, but he seems to have, like dirk, taken a big step later in his career instead of emerging fully formed like several other top 10 players.

the criteria is not meant to be applicable across the board for each and every player but if the player possesses more than half of these criteria and in sufficient amount then he passes the test.

my hunch based on your attitude towards lbj is you are a big fan of bryant and there is nothing wrong with that.[/QUOTE]

no, has nothing to do with personal biases. I think Lebron is currently at where most people would place him. 11-13 area. Kobe is definitely top 10, like what most people say. But the rest of your list is just outrageous: Kareem at 10. :rolleyes:

[QUOTE=riseagainst]no, has nothing to do with personal biases. I think Lebron is currently at where most people would place him. 11-13 area. Kobe is definitely top 10, like what most people say. But the rest of your list is just outrageous: Kareem at 10. :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]


i had the benefit of seeing him play. if he were all that you would wish him to be then he should have dominated the 70s, but he lacked many of the criteria i listed in sufficient degree. he had some very solid players to work with and his stats are undeniable as are chamberlain's and erving's and baylor's and yes bryant's too.

as soon as magic johnson arrived his career took on a renaissance.

i guess the litmus test is the question: "which player would you start a team with and build around?" and base your rankings on that.

that's pretty much what my list is about-- because basketball is the ultimate team sport. hope that clarifies things.

[QUOTE=Round Mound]Bob Pettit and Rick Barry should be there. I had to choose between both cause Stockton was not more dominant than them.

Isiah Thomas over Barkley?[/QUOTE]

Let's get two things straight here:

1) It's your call on that list. Pettit isn't the problem and Barry is a stretch, but I don't have a problem with it. Their both over Stockon, though.

2) Why are you bringing up Zeke over Barkley to me ? I'm not the one who has Zeke over Barkley, there is a poster who did but it's not me. Infact, here's my Top 20-25:

[QUOTE=Legends66NBA7]No order:

LeBron James
Moses Malone
Jerry West
Oscar Robertson
Charles Barkley
Kevin Garnett
Karl Malone
George Mikan
Dirk Nowtizki
Julius Erving

Including what they did in their era. I only feel a bit uncomfortable with my Mikan ranking, but I feel he did a lot too for his era and changed the game.[/QUOTE]

Later reconsidering my Top 25:

[QUOTE=Legends66NBA7]I would say the next 5 players, to round up the Top 25 would be (no order):

David Robinson
John Havlicek
Elgin Baylor
Dwyane Wade
Bob Pettit (Actually, re thinking about it... I would replace Mikan with Pettit)

@fplii

Why Pippen over Robinson and Barkley ? I think Zeke's too high, as well.[/QUOTE]

I even mentioned to a poster Zeke was too high...

Again, what about Zeke ? Point out the right poster when your trying to be funny. I don't have either Zeke or Stockton in my Top 25 (I don't have it in order either, but their not there)... Their probably Top 30-35 range.

I don't consider Zeke over Barkley. And Stockton over Garnett is a joke, you posted that not me, before switching it over.

[QUOTE=Alan Shore]my criteria are:

making others around you better
BBIQ
positive-sum player
will
leadership
clutch, ability to focus

individual stats and media-based awards are not as important to me... no joke.[/QUOTE]

So a Hakeem, who seldom could even get his team's to 50 wins, beat up one of his teammates, basically demanded a trade, lost EIGHT times in the FIRST ROUND (and most were blowouts), and was nowhere near the all-around dominant player that Chamberlain was...is ranked FIVE slots ahead of him?

One of the most ridiculous posts that I have read in a while...which is saying something.

:facepalm

[QUOTE=Alan Shore]my criteria are:

making others around you better
BBIQ
positive-sum player
will
leadership
clutch, ability to focus

individual stats and media-based awards are not as important to me... no joke.[/QUOTE]

The problem I have with criteria like these is that they are 100% subjective. It's very hard for anyone to relate to the conclusions you draw unless they think just like you.

[QUOTE=jlauber]So a Hakeem, who seldom could even get his team's to 50 wins, beat up one of his teammates, basically demanded a trade, lost EIGHT times in the FIRST ROUND (and most were blowouts), and was nowhere near the all-around dominant player that Chamberlain was...is ranked FIVE slots ahead of him?

One of the most ridiculous posts that I have read in a while...which is saying something.

:facepalm[/QUOTE]


3 spots ahead, yes.

ridiculous is in the eye of the beholder. olajuwon was hampered by ralph sampson who was a horrendous underachiever. then he was surrounded by a lot of bums while trying to get past the lakers. chamberlain for all his dominance underachieved. he admitted his selfishness in conversations with bill russell and he proved how good he could have been when he "decided" to show his critics that he could be a supreme facilitator by leading the league in assists per game two years running, if memory serves. one of those season he won the title with the sixers.

dominance does not correlate with greatness in a team sport. chamberlain is the wellspring of this fallacy.

[QUOTE=Alan Shore]3 spots ahead, yes.

ridiculous is in the eye of the beholder. olajuwon was hampered by ralph sampson who was a horrendous underachiever. then he was surrounded by a lot of bums while trying to get past the lakers. chamberlain for all his dominance underachieved. he admitted his selfishness in conversations with bill russell and he proved how good he could have been when he "decided" to show his critics that he could be a supreme facilitator by leading the league in assists per game two years running, if memory serves. one of those season he won the title with the sixers.

[B]dominance does not correlate with greatness in a team sport.[/B] chamberlain is the wellspring of this fallacy.[/QUOTE]

The bolded is something jlauber just doesn't seem to grasp. It leads him to conclude that M.Malone was a top 10 all time player (and better than Hakeem), which is truly ridiculous.

[QUOTE=G.O.A.T]The problem I have with criteria like these is that they are 100% subjective. It's very hard for anyone to relate to the conclusions you draw unless they think just like you.[/QUOTE]


you may have a point. but using statistics and awards as the source of an argument rather than support of it seems an empty exercise in my opinion.

statistics in basketball are not as objective or as definitive as people want them to be. the only team sport that statistics seem to work well for is baseball but baseball is different from soccer, football, basketball, and hockey because of its largely static nature.

as my lone supporter "oolalaa" has already implied: it is a mistake to use statistical dominance as a support for greatness in a team sport.

[QUOTE=RIP CITY]

[B]11. Oscar Robertson -[/B] I agree with the sentiment that for what he did in his era he should probably be ranked higher. His statistics are mind boggling for today's game. Some would say, how can you rank him lower when based on your own criteria you said you would chose the best player over pretty much everything else, and his statistics point that he is better than ______ who you have ranked ahead of him. Again, talent and skill level, impact on the game are high points for me. From a talent and skill perspective he is behind the 8 ball in terms of perimeter players because they had a chance to learn from the player that learned from the player that learned from watching him play. It may be unfair to him in some ways but it just is what it is. Still, the fact that he's still so close to the Top 10 shows the lasting power he had despite the lack of predecessorary knowledge.

[B]12. LeBron James -[/B] Really the only reason he's not higher is because his career isn't over yet. I hate him as a fan, don't find his game particularly exciting to watch but you can't deny the talent and skill he plays with even if it isn't as pretty as other players. Though his defense is quite overrated you could argue he's the greatest offensive player ever (you can make a case he is, I don't think he is). One of the best all-around basketball players ever. He will eventually go down as a Top 10 player minimum and probably end up in the Top 5. Unfortunately.

[B]13. Moses Malone -[/B] Dominant big man, extremely productive who fared well against any big man competition he faced.

[B]14. Julius Erving -[/B] Ahead of his time in talent, skill and creativity. Stands the test of time despite players that who patterned their game after him and advanced the perimeter game from where it was when he played.

[B]15. Jerry West -[/B] One of the greatest scorers of All-Time, one of the clutchest players of All-Time. His scoring skills were ahead of their time despite being very fundamentally based. Also a very good rebounder for his position and very good playmaker.

[B]16. David Robinson -[/B] One of the most skilled and talented Centers/big men to ever play the game. He had it all and then some. Great post scorer, good mid-range jump shot, solid passer for his position, set screens, great post and weakside/team defender, great shot blocker, great rebounder, great leader, great athleticism. One of the greatest defensive players ever. Truly the total package, at his peak he was arguably as dominant as any big men in NBA history including some of the bigs in the Top 10.

[B]17. Kevin Garnett -[/B] Will always have detractors because of his lack of Playoffs success in Minnesota and his overblown (not that there wasn't [I]some[/I] truth to it) lack of being the go-to guy in crunch time. But this guy, like Robinson was the total package, maybe the single most versatile player of All-Time and certainly the most versatile big man of All-Time (IMO). Could score in the post, mid-range (and slightly extended), fastbreak and was a great finisher. One of the most athletic bigs of All-Time. Defensively he was a great post defender, help/team/weakside defender, very good perimeter defender for a big man and possibly the greatest pick-n-roll/pop defender of ever. One of the greatest defensive players ever. Really I have a hard time with ranking him, I always want to find a way to rank him higher just hard with the players above him. Amazing talent/skill level.

[B]18. Isiah Thomas -[/B] I'm sure alot of people will want to call this a homer pick but to me there weren't many PG's as skilled or talented as Isiah Thomas. I've always considered him the 3rd best PG behind the Magic and Oscar, he was a great scorer capable of taking over games, one of the best passers of All-Time and a very underrated defensive player (admittedly that took much improvement from his earlier years where he was pretty average at best). He had an enormous impact on the floor.

[B]19. Charles Barkley -[/B] I agree with Charles that he was better than Karl Malone. Not by a ton, by a very slim margin but just enough for me to rank him ahead of him (Malone is #21). Completely agree with Barkley not being as reliant on teammates to get him going offensively. Amazing rebounder, especially considering he was probably 6'6'' bare feet and maybe 6'7'' with shoes. He obviously wasn't the greatest defender in the world and that's what makes him this low on the list, because with a good defensive game to match what he did on the boards and offensively he could have been at least Top 15.

[B]20. Elgin Baylor -[/B] Kind of the Kobe of his time in the sense that, at least in today's debates of these lists, he's one of most polarizing players. Some people say he was amazing, some people say he was very overrated. In my opinion based on watching him play (I've tried to watch as many full games of the Top 20 or so players from before my time) I would say he was a skilled and talented player that was ahead of his time.[/QUOTE]


Really like this list a lot. I like the fact that you put Robinson in there, he was an absolute monster offensively and defensively.

I with you one hundred percent on the Barkely vs Malone debate. Battle of peak/prime vs longevity in my opinion. Which do you value more? Personally I value peak/prime slightly more and therefore tend to side with Barkley, though I can see an argument either way.

I don't think I rate Isiah quite as highly as you do, but I'd put him in the 20-25 range for sure.

My list would probably be

20. John Havlicek
19. Charles Barkley
18. David Robinson
17. Bob Pettit
16. Elgin Baylor
15. Julius Erving
14. Jerry West
13. Moses Malone
12. Oscar Robertson
11. Lebron James

I might change it up a bit when I get a chance to sit down and really think about it, but that's my first attempt for the time being.

[QUOTE=oolalaa]The bolded is something jlauber just doesn't seem to grasp. It leads him to conclude that M.Malone was a top 10 all time player (and better than Hakeem), which is truly ridiculous.[/QUOTE]

Moses and Hakeem were both dominant and great. They both achieved greatness in both individual and team accomplishments. Both achieved dominance in a specific skill.

Besides, even if Moses isn't Top 10, he's damn near close to it, I would assume.

Lets say for example, Moses is ranked Top 15... Moses is ranked 11th out of the Top 15... and Hakeem is Top 10, ranking 10th... is there really THAT big of a difference ? :confusedshrug: