Printable View
[QUOTE=kNicKz]Insidehoops: Where it's an accepted belief that pistol pete= gilbert arenas
:facepalm :facepalm :facepalm[/QUOTE]
Well yeah, I disagree with that completely and I brought that up in my post with Swoosh, though he said he's Gilbert Arenas caliber not equal... and that is because Pete was one the best passers ever and it was better than his scoring. Arenas was a true chucker.
But with all that said, Wade > Pistol and it's not close, I hope you were trolling man. :oldlol:
[QUOTE=DMV2]He was the original T-Mac; 4 playoff appearances (three 1st round exit when he was a star, 2nd Round exit when he was a benchwarmer)
EDIT: ...the guy has a T-Mac avatar too. LMAO.[/QUOTE]
I will give McGrady this, he was clearly a better playoff performer than Pistol Pete.
If you took away their bench years, McGrady has that by a mile for what it's worth.
I got D Wade #4 GOAT SG behind MJ, Kobe, and West. I think he has a great shot at passing West for the #3 slot down the road.
[QUOTE=La Frescobaldi]Hondo was a swing man, played a lot of games at what today would be called the 2. There wasn't really a shooting guard like it's called today, and there wasn't a point guard either. Not by the names. Today those guards would be called combo guards.
Point guard was a name used in college for a long time before anybody started using that in the pros, and it's false to say the name started with Magic Johnson, as I have seen around on boards. People were using that name around the NBA as early as maybe '75 or '77. No question that it really caught on with Magic though, maybe you could say he popularized it.
But anyhow, Havlicek was a swing man by any name of any era. He played a lot of frontcourt and he played a lot of backcourt.
In many ways, today's NBA is based on the John Havlicek model of player, more than any other single player, except maybe the sort of "cult of the next Mike Jordan" that's out there. Not because Havlicek is necessarily a guy the players or the fans respect or emulate or even heard of, but because that's the most effective way to play basketball. And the coaches and GMs all know it and look for that type of player.[/QUOTE]
U make an interesting observation about Hondo. And frankly I agree with u! Hondo at 6'5 was capable of playing AND defending PG to SF. He was also a great scorer, great passer, great defender, and great rebounder (for a perimter guy) all in one. Before Hondo, I can't really think of player as well rounded. Even with Big O, I don't think his defense qualifies as great. And even though Big O could play virutally PG-PF, he's known as the original big and dominant PG. Hondo was a SF or swingman so when u break it down like that, he was TRULY the precursor in many ways to guys like MJ, Kobe, Hill, Bron, Pippen etc. I do think Big O, Baylor, Hondo, and Barry were ahead of their time BIG TIME in the 60's and 70's.
It wasn't until 10-15 years later minimum that u saw players in that 6'5 to 6'7 range or even taller with that kind of talent more commonly. And even historically, u don't see many players as dominant and versatile as Hondo. Guys took what Hondo did the next level, MJ included. MJ was more similar to Hondo than he ever was to Magic or Bird. It was almost as if MJ took Dr. J's aerial assault, Gervin' scoring skillset, and combined with Hondo's epic all around versatility on both sides of the ball. Even today, Bron in many ways is evolved version in many ways to what Hondo brought to the table.
[QUOTE=bizil]U make an interesting observation about Hondo. And frankly I agree with u! Hondo at 6'5 was capable of playing AND defending PG to SF. He was also a great scorer, great passer, great defender, and great rebounder (for a perimter guy) all in one. Before Hondo, I can't really think of player as well rounded. Even with Big O, I don't think he defense qualifies as great. And even though Big O could play virutally PG-PF, he's known as the original big and dominant PG. Hondo was a SF or swingman so when u break it down like that, [B]he was TRULY the precursor in many ways to guys like MJ, Kobe, Hill, Bron, Pippen etc.[/B][/QUOTE] No, wrong... Based on testomony of actual players, what your suggesting doesn't sound like the reality of how things were at all, it sounds like this is nothing but revisionist history. The original medium sized "do it all" basketball player that could play both backcourt or frontcourt, and matchup against guards or forwards always traces back to Elgin Baylor who came into the scene in the late 50's several years before Hondo, and made far far greater impact. Baylor changed the game of basketball forever and revolutionized the impact of what players his size could do. It was not John Havlicek who set the mold for future "complete" players, it was Elgin Baylor.
[QUOTE=CavaliersFTW]No, wrong... Based on testomony of actual players, what your suggesting doesn't sound like the reality of how things were at all, it sounds like this is nothing but revisionist history. The original medium sized "do it all" basketball player that could play both backcourt or frontcourt, and matchup against guards or forwards always traces back to Elgin Baylor who came into the seen in the late 50's several years before Hondo, and made far far greater impact. Baylor changed the game of basketball forever and revolutionized the impact of what players his size could do. It was not John Havlicek who set the mold for future "complete" players, it was Elgin Baylor.[/QUOTE]
All true.
But Hondo is, to me, the prototype or model because of his killer instinct, will to win, utter clutchness and above all.... He was completely missing what Baylor had on the other end of the court - atrocious matador defense.
[QUOTE=CavaliersFTW]No, wrong... Based on testomony of actual players, what your suggesting doesn't sound like the reality of how things were at all, it sounds like this is nothing but revisionist history. The original medium sized "do it all" basketball player that could play both backcourt or frontcourt, and matchup against guards or forwards always traces back to Elgin Baylor who came into the scene in the late 50's several years before Hondo, and made far far greater impact. Baylor changed the game of basketball forever and revolutionized the impact of what players his size could do. It was not John Havlicek who set the mold for future "complete" players, it was Elgin Baylor.[/QUOTE]
Baylor was not a point forward kind of player. And Baylor wasn't a lockdown defender capable of locking down PG-SF. Baylor set the tone for the freak athlete scoring machine. Who also happened to be a good defender, great rebounder, and good passer. That mold of player to me is the blueprint for Dr.J. Or in terms of freak athletic ability and alpha dog scoring ability it also set the tone for MJ, Kobe, Bron, Drexler, Hawkins, etc.
Hondo was more technically sound than Baylor. And Hondo was GREAT at scoring, passing, boards, and defense all in one. I don't think Baylor was GREAT at all four facets, especially on a technical level like Hondo. I'm not saying Baylor wasn't a very good maybe great all around threat. But Hondo could flat out play AND defend PG-SF.
I believe peak value wise that Baylor is the better player. And in the evolution of bball was more important. But Hondo in my opinion was MORE of precursor than Baylor was to the swingmen who came later down the road. The responsibilities guys like MJ, Pippen, T Mac, Hill, Kobe, Drexler, Penny, Bron, etc. had on the court were more similar to Hondo type duties and versatility than Baylor type guys like a Dr.J or Hawkins. And Baylor of all intensive purposes was a SF-PF as opposed to a pure swingman like Hondo. Or a guy like MJ who was a SG but played plenty of PG and SF. In terms of technical brilliance and versatility for medium size players, Big O , Barry, and Hondo were more important in my book than Baylor was.
This is all everyone needs to know
1. MJ
2. Kobe
3. everyone else
[QUOTE=BlueandGold]This is all everyone needs to know
1. MJ
2. Kobe
3. everyone else[/QUOTE]
I think those two are clearly 1-2. After that the debates can begin. I'm inclined to think that West is 3, Wade 4, and Drexler 5. But after that u have guys like AI, Gervin, Pete, Pearl, Ray Ray, Sam Jones, Miller, and Dumars who all have a case for top 10. And don't sleep on the HOF type resumes guys like Vince, Bing, and Richmond put up. Guys like T Mac and David Thompson could have really shook up the ratings if it weren't for injuries or drugs. Both I think were looking like top 5-6 material and each in their own way were redefining the SG spot at the time they were going great.
I'm the biggest wade fan you will ever meet but I'm also an objective bball fan and there's no argument that wade is even in the same ballpark as Kobe
[QUOTE=STATUTORY]I'm the biggest wade fan you will ever meet but I'm also an objective bball fan and there's no argument that wade is even in the same ballpark as Kobe[/QUOTE]
In terms of longevity, no he is not in the same ballpark as kobe. Then again who really is.
[QUOTE=red1]In terms of longevity, no he is not in the same ballpark as kobe. Then again who really is.[/QUOTE]
in term of peak and prime, Wade doesn't measure up either.
And this is coming from a Wade fan who don't even like kobe
[QUOTE=STATUTORY]in term of peak and prime, Wade doesn't measure up either.
And this is coming from a Wade fan who don't even like kobe[/QUOTE]
I'm a Wade fan that thinks he's been complete ass for the past 1.5 seasons but in terms of peak and prime Wade DEFINITELY measures up to Kobe. Peak is a toss-up.
[QUOTE=STATUTORY]in term of peak and prime, Wade doesn't measure up either.
And this is coming from a Wade fan who don't even like kobe[/QUOTE]
Stop saying you're a Wade fan, haha you're clearly not. Fooling no one.
Wade's peak stands up, but obviously not in longevity terms.
[QUOTE=STATUTORY]in term of peak and prime, Wade doesn't measure up either.
And this is coming from a Wade fan who don't even like kobe[/QUOTE]
Niqqa stop lying. U one of the biggest Bryant fanatics on this shit. Trying to front :oldlol: