Printable View
[QUOTE=tpols;15023151]All of the perimeter players on this list are clearly better than prime Klay. I would've said it was close with Haliburton but after his playoff run hell nah. Klay never came close to doing the shit he did over and over and over. So he wouldn't have made All NBA in that year.[/QUOTE]
Is that something you felt the need to just say for your sake :confusedshrug:? Because Klay has nothing to do with why I dropped that list.
[QUOTE=tpols;15023151]All of the perimeter players on this list are clearly better than prime Klay. I would've said it was close with Haliburton but after his playoff run hell nah. Klay never came close to doing the shit he did over and over and over. So he wouldn't have made All NBA in that year.[/QUOTE]
And Pippen was without question a top 10 player throughout the 90's, making 3ball's entire premise moot. Considering Richmond was making All-NBA multiple times on sub 30 win teams, it's safe to say Pippen would've been a perennial All-NBA player regardless of where he played.
[QUOTE=1987_Lakers;15023143]Can't believe 3ball really used 2012, does he not know it was a lockout year?
And lying about Dantley making All-NBA in '80 & '82.
This is why nobody takes him seriously.[/QUOTE]
^^^ Impact-less oversights, so the point stands that 2nd options need winning teams to make All-NBA, with only 4 exceptions in 40 years..
2nd options need winning spotlight to be seen as All-NBA because their performance isn't enough on it's own.. Otoh, 1st options routinely make All-NBA with losing teams because they dominate... Essentially, All-NBA is reserved for 1st options and their dominance, unless a secondary option has sufficient winning spotlight
[QUOTE=3ba11;15023165]^^^ Impact-less oversights, so the point stands that 2nd options need winning teams to make All-NBA, with only 4 exceptions in 40 years..
2nd options need winning spotlight to be seen as All-NBA because their performance isn't enough on it's own.. Otoh, 1st options routinely make All-NBA with losing teams because they dominate... Essentially, All-NBA is reserved for 1st options, unless a secondary option has sufficient winning spotlight[/QUOTE]
You got caught lying son. You lost.
[QUOTE=1987_Lakers;15023166]You got caught lying son. You lost.[/QUOTE]
Yeah I'm not 5 so that's not going to work.. I won the argument regarding 2nd options needing winning teams to make All-NBA - [I]it's the historical record[/I].. And thanks for summarizing 'Phoenix's edits (to the list of All-NBA players that won 20-40 games)
[QUOTE=3ba11;15023167]Yeah I'm not 5 so that's not going to work.. I won the argument regarding 2nd options needing winning teams to make All-NBA - [I]it's the historical record[/I].. And thanks for summarizing 'Phoenix's edits (to the list of All-NBA players that won 20-40 games)[/QUOTE]
Um,no. Me arguing with you over what's a first or 2nd option isn't a lie. You putting Adrian Dantley on all-NBA teams he was never on, or using Lebron's rookie season win total are not 'impactless' oversights. You lied, multiple times, and it's all there for everyone to see. So you haven't won anything, neither the basis of your content or the fact that you tried to extend your list with blatantly false info and trying pass it off as 'harmless oversight'. You're just a straight up bitch.
[QUOTE=Phoenix;15023170]Um,no. Me arguing with you over what's a first or 2nd option isn't a lie. You putting Adrian Dantley on all-NBA teams he was never on, or using Lebron's rookie season win total are not 'impactless' oversights. You lied, multiple times, and it's all there for everyone to see. So you haven't won anything, neither the basis of your content or the fact that you tried to extend your list with blatantly false info and trying pass it off as 'harmless oversight'. You're just a straight up bitch.[/QUOTE]
Four 2nd options in 45 years made All-NBA with losing teams... That's what matters - 2nd options need winning spotlight to make All-NBA.
And Isiah is a 1st option by virtue of being one for his entire career - he isn't a "pippen" or "klay", and this is common knowledge..
Infact, Klay and Pippen needed 67-win teams and league favorite to make their first All-NBA - the subsequent titles gave them the permanent winning spotlight that Parker, Ginobili and Pau enjoyed to get their All-NBA selections as well.. The idea is to trick the dumb media by landing alongside a goat 1st option that can carry you to titles - the historical and statistical record shows that this is what these winning 2nd options did to make All-NBA.
.
.
.
[SIZE=4]REVISED LIST of All-NBA selections w/ losing teams (40 wins or less), since 1980 (2nd options bolded[/SIZE]
[indent]1981 Dantley - 28 wins
1983 Isiah - 37 wins
1985 Jordan - 37 wins
[B]1986 Robertson - 35 wins[/B]
[B]1987 Lever - 37 wins [/B]
1990 Mullin - 37 wins
1991 King - 30 wins
[B]1992 Willis - 34 wins[/B]
1993 Hardaway - 34 wins
1994 Richmond - 27 wins
1998 Richmond - 28 wins
1995 Richmond - 39 wins
1996 Richmond - 39 wins
1997 Richmond - 34 wins
2000 Marbury - 31 wins
2004 McGrady - 21 wins
2004 Lebron - 35 wins
2015 Cousins - 29 wins
2016 Cousins - 33 wins
2017 AD - 34 wins
2019 Kemba - 39 wins
2020 Lillard - 35 wins
2023 Luka - 38 wins[/indent]
[B]CONCLUSION[/B]: 2nd options need winning teams to make All-NBA, with only 4 exceptions in 40 years..
2nd options need winning spotlight to be seen as All-NBA because their performance isn't enough on it's own.. Otoh, 1st options routinely make All-NBA with losing teams because they dominate... Essentially, All-NBA is reserved for 1st options and their dominance, unless a secondary option has sufficient winning spotlight.
Finally, if we run the numbers for 40-50 win teams, there are only a half dozen examples of 2nd options getting All-NBA with these records - infact, Klay and Pippen needed 67-win teams and league favorite to make their first All-NBA - the subsequent titles gave them the permanent winning spotlight that Parker, Ginobili and Pau enjoyed to get their All-NBA selections as well.. The idea is to trick the dumb media by landing alongside a goat 1st option that can carry you to titles - the historical and statistical record shows that this is what these winning 2nd options did to make All-NBA
[QUOTE=3ba11;15023173]Four 2nd options in 45 years made All-NBA with losing teams... That's what matters - 2nd options need winning spotlight to make All-NBA.
And Isiah is a 1st option by virtue of being one for his entire career - he isn't a "pippen" or "klay", and this is common knowledge..
Infact, Klay and Pippen needed 67-win teams and league favorite to make their first All-NBA - the subsequent titles gave them the permanent winning spotlight that Parker, Ginobili and Pau enjoyed to get their All-NBA selections as well.. The idea is to trick the dumb media by landing alongside a goat 1st option that can carry you to titles - the historical and statistical record shows that this is what these winning 2nd options did to make All-NBA.[/QUOTE]
Nah my list is in the dozens, and I invalidated multiple parts of yours with your lying. You're a conniving little bitch who needs to validate yourself with self-congratulatory 'I won something' rhetoric. If you weren't micro-dicked I'm sure you'd suck yourself off and then claim it as sex.
[QUOTE=3ba11;15023175].
.
.
[SIZE=4]REVISED LIST of All-NBA selections w/ losing teams (40 wins or less), since 1980 (2nd options bolded[/SIZE]
[indent]1981 Dantley - 28 wins
1983 Isiah - 37 wins
1985 Jordan - 37 wins
[B]1986 Robertson - 35 wins[/B]
[B]1987 Lever - 37 wins [/B]
1990 Mullin - 37 wins
1991 King - 30 wins
[B]1992 Willis - 34 wins[/B]
1993 Hardaway - 34 wins
1994 Richmond - 27 wins
1998 Richmond - 28 wins
1995 Richmond - 39 wins
1996 Richmond - 39 wins
1997 Richmond - 34 wins
2000 Marbury - 31 wins
2004 McGrady - 21 wins
2004 Lebron - 35 wins
2015 Cousins - 29 wins
2016 Cousins - 33 wins
2017 AD - 34 wins
2019 Kemba - 39 wins
2020 Lillard - 35 wins
2023 Luka - 38 wins[/indent]
[B]CONCLUSION[/B]: 2nd options need winning teams to make All-NBA, with only 4 exceptions in 40 years..
2nd options need winning spotlight to be seen as All-NBA because their performance isn't enough on it's own.. Otoh, 1st options routinely make All-NBA with losing teams because they dominate... Essentially, All-NBA is reserved for 1st options and their dominance, unless a secondary option has sufficient winning spotlight.
Finally, if we run the numbers for 40-50 win teams, there are only a half dozen examples of 2nd options getting All-NBA with these records - infact, Klay and Pippen needed 67-win teams and league favorite to make their first All-NBA - the subsequent titles gave them the permanent winning spotlight that Parker, Ginobili and Pau enjoyed to get their All-NBA selections as well.. The idea is to trick the dumb media by landing alongside a goat 1st option that can carry you to titles - the historical and statistical record shows that this is what these winning 2nd options did to make All-NBA[/QUOTE]
So let's see:
- You lied about Adrian Dantley, he didn't make all-NBA in 80 and 82. Off the list those years
- Isiah was 2nd option to Tripucka in 83, so that argument works for me thanks
- Dominique won 42 wins in 94 per basketball reference, playing 25 for the Clips and 49 for ATL. Nice try, he's off the list.
- Lebron won 42 games in 2004-2005. The 35 wins you're giving his is for his rookie year. Off the list
- 2012 Chandler is a defensive big,so since you count him you've legitimized guys like Bogut, Drummond, Mutumbo, Horford, thanks
- 2012 is also a asterisk year due to lockout, 66 game season but the Knicks were 36-30 so Melo/Chandler had a winning season that year. Nice try
- Dwight missed 28 games and missed out on 40 wins by 3 games.
- 2020 was a shortened season due to lockdowns, asterisk
- Luka missed out on 40 wins by 2 wins, missing 16 games
CONCLUSION: You lied about Adrian Dantley in 1980 and 82 being all-NBA those years, Isiah was 2nd option to Tripucka in 83, lied about 94 Nique who got 42 total wins playing for both the Hawks( 49) and the Clippers( 25) and you sneakily gave him the Clips 27 win total when he didn't even play that many games for LA , lied about Lebron giving his rookie win total of 35 wins instead of 42 in 2005 when he made 2nd team, ignore that 2012 was a 66 game lockout year and then pretend like Melo and Chandler didn't have a winning record at 36/30, 2020 was pandemic year shortened season, and Luka wins 40+ if he didn't miss 16 games.
So, your actual list of first options for which you didn't lie( 80 and 82 Dantley, 94 Wilkins, 05 Lebron), not note legit asterisks for why a player wouldn't have easily broke 40 wins( Luka 2023) if not for serious time missed to injury or shortened seasons( Melo 2012, Dame 2020), meaning the player played the majority of the year and wouldn't have gotten 40 wins because the team just was that bad/mediocre:
- Adrian Dantley 82
- Jordan 85
- Mullin 90
- Richmond 94-98( which is actually one player just getting in multiple times instead of multiple players, but I'll play along)'
- Maybury 2000
- Tmac 2004
- Cousins 2015
- Cousins 2016 won 33 whlle missing 17, but we'll let that one slip
- AD 2017
- Kemba 2020
That's very far from there being 'tons' of first options who made all-nba with 20-40 wins, and that's if you include players who missed 16-28 games and act like they wouldn't have won 40 games in some cases,weren't impacted by lockout, or ignore that a few players happened to benefit from periods of weak positional competition ( Richmond winning 27 games, for example) that largely wouldn't fly today. Heaps of context needed here that you conveniently omit.
OTOH 83 Isiah can now be added to my list of non-first option players so you'll appreciate me bolding him, who made all-NBA without 'winning spotlight' inflation like 85 Alvin Robertson,87 Fat Lever, 92 Kevin Willis, 93 Derrick Coleman, 93 Hardaway( bolded him as well for your convenience),96 Juwan Howard,97 Vin Baker, 98 Rod Strickland, 02 Mutumbo( defensive centric big like CHandler), 06 Yao Ming, 2013 David Lee, 2016 Andre Drummond( defensive big like Chandler), 2018 KAT, 2011 Horford( defensive big like CHandler), 2023/2024 Sabonis. These players were either 2nd option/scorer for the years I listed, or 2nd/3rd best player like a Mutumbo or Strickland type BUT more specifically, were not the defacto first options for those years. If they were definitive first option in other years, like Coleman in 94, doesn't dismiss that he was 2nd option to Petrovic in 93. Furthermore the lists provided here by both of us, regardless of how certain players are described for the purpose of our respective arguments, show recent voting patterns clearly indicating that players getting all-NBA whether they be first or 2nd option on sub 40 win teams is becoming even less common in recent years, let alone over history. The historical record of the past 5 seasons as I listed shows that outside of Luka in 2023 getting 38 wins while missing 16 games, Kemba in 2019, and 2020 Dame in a lockout year, the voters aren't handing out all-NBA awards like candy to sub 40 win players. There's no Mitch Richmonds getting all-nba for 27 wins in the year 2025, not when over the past 5-6 years Devin Booker has seasons averaging 26-28 on 50 win teams and doesn't touch all-NBA.
[QUOTE=SouBeachTalents;15023153]And Pippen was without question a top 10 player throughout the 90's, making 3ball's entire premise moot. Considering Richmond was making All-NBA multiple times on sub 30 win teams, it's safe to say Pippen would've been a perennial All-NBA player regardless of where he played.[/QUOTE]
The problem is Pippen didn't play like a top 10 player in the playoffs in any year except 1991. He was getting outplayed in series by guys like Xavier McDaniels and Detlef Shremph and other not even close to top 10 players in his prime peak in playoff series.
He is better than Klay though I'll give you that because when his shot wasnt falling his defense actually was on GOAT tier and its measurable unlike Klay. Pippen is the only player to lead league in DRTG in the 90s that wasnt a center ~ Ewing, Hakeem, Robinson.
[QUOTE=tpols;15023185]The problem is Pippen didn't play like a top 10 player in the playoffs in any year except 1991. He was getting outplayed in series by guys like Xavier McDaniels and Detlef Shremph and other not even close to top 10 players in his prime peak in playoff series.
He is better than Klay though I'll give you that because when his shot wasnt falling his defense actually was on GOAT tier and its measurable unlike Klay. Pippen is the only player to lead league in DRTG in the 90s that wasnt a center ~ Ewing, Hakeem, Robinson.[/QUOTE]
In addition to defense and ballhandling, Pippen's strength was that he ran the court like a deer.
Normally, a player doesn't have to worry about running the court - it's something that is done naturally.. But when a defender has to actually focus on not getting beat down the court on every possession, it takes a toll and their offense - that's what Pippen did to guys - he destroyed them in transition and secondary breaks.. And his IQ was excellent - he learned the triangle to absolute perfection, which was necessary for him because his halfcourt offense otherwise struggled.
All that being said, there are many ways to skin a cat defensively... An upgrade from Paxson to Kenny Smith and Vernon Maxwell would improve the playmaking and defense at that position, thereby allowing Pippen to be "downgraded" to Horry... Essentially, give MJ the same cast Hakeem had, and he would win pretty much the same way.. Of course, Horry was an excellent defender that provided the clutch and spacing that Pippen couldn't, which culminated in a 95' Finals performance and gamescore that Pippen never matched in 6 tries.
[QUOTE=tpols;15023185]The problem is Pippen didn't play like a top 10 player in the playoffs in any year except 1991. He was getting outplayed in series by guys like Xavier McDaniels and Detlef Shremph and other not even close to top 10 players in his prime peak in playoff series.
He is better than Klay though I'll give you that because when his shot wasnt falling his defense actually was on GOAT tier and its measurable unlike Klay. Pippen is the only player to lead league in DRTG in the 90s that wasnt a center ~ Ewing, Hakeem, Robinson.[/QUOTE]
As you know All-NBA isn't based off the playoffs, so even if his play did drop off in the postseason, that doesn't change the fact he would've been a perennial All-NBA player regardless of the team that he played for.
And here's where context is important, even if you believe his level of play dropped in the postseason, he still outscored the opposing teams 2nd option in 18 of 24 playoff series during their title runs, so factoring in his GOAT tier defense and playmaking, he was still very often at worst the 3rd best player on the floor in the vast majority of these series.
[QUOTE=3ba11;15023188]In addition to defense and ballhandling, Pippen's strength was that he ran the court like a deer.
[B]Normally, a player doesn't have to worry about running the court - it's something that is done naturally.. But when a defender has to actually focus on not getting beat down the court on every possession, it takes a toll and their offense - that's what Pippen did to guys - he destroyed them in transition and secondary breaks.. And his IQ was excellent - he learned the triangle to absolute perfection, which was necessary for him because his halfcourt offense otherwise struggled.[/B]
All that being said, there are many ways to skin a cat defensively... An upgrade from Paxson to Kenny Smith and Vernon Maxwell would improve the playmaking and defense at that position, thereby allowing Pippen to be "downgraded" to Horry... Essentially, give MJ the same cast Hakeem had, and he would win pretty much the same way.. Of course, Horry was an excellent defender that provided the clutch and spacing that Pippen couldn't, which culminated in a 95' Finals performance and gamescore that Pippen never matched in 6 tries.[/QUOTE]
Whoa! The rare Pippen compliment :lol
It's funny how opposing SG's always gush about MJ's defense - they say things like "if MJ didn't want you to score - you didn't score"... But why don't SF's say that about Pippen??... It's because they all destroyed Pippen and scored on him at will.. There are videos of Schrempf, Mullin, Glenn Robinson, Mashburn and Grant Hill making Pippen look like he's in high school - Pippen couldn't BEGIN to stop opposing SF's... They all had their way with him - even a hobbled Worthy was scoring on Pippen like he wasn't even there in the 91' Finals.