SLAM: The 500 Greatest NBA Players of All-Time (complete list)

Marion, Francis and Big Z are all way too high.

Ewing too low; O.R. too high.

and there is no way Shaq is above KAJ. None. Sorry, Big Fella.

There are plenty of other errors as well that should discredit this list.

Wow, so Glen Rice really [i]was[/i] ranked below Tom Gugliotta. Innnteresting.

In other news, I respect SLAM's attempt. Like another poster said, Top 50's and 100's has been done over and over again.

[QUOTE=ShaqAttack3234]Dirk is definitely too low.

And what exactly are Frazier, Schayes, Unseld, Reed, Kidd, McHale, Hayes and Stockton doing ahead of Ewing? [/quote]

I have all of those players except Kidd ahead of him. Frazier and Reed are obvious. Ask any Knick fan who saw them and they will agree that they are more important than Ewing. Unseld won an MVP and a title, that makes that easy, Hayes and Stockton have better all-time numbers and more all-NBA and all-defensive nods. Dolph Schayes was the best player on a title team and a 12-time all-NBA pick, it would be a crime to have Ewing above him.


[QUOTE=ShaqAttack3234]Hakeem outside of the top 10 is laughable and Kareem as low as 7th is horrible, I really don't see how Kareem isn't top 3(I have him and MJ basically tied for 1/2).
[/QUOTE]

Both Kareem and Hakeem are much more highly regarded online than they are in the circles of 30 somethings that I talk Hoops with. My friend Tim was an editor for Athlon Sports (You've seen their season preview issues and fantasy guides I'm sure) They ranked Kareem at #7 in 1997, Hakeem came in at #16 then.

It's not really laughable when you consider that a lot of fans see Kareem as having wasted an entire decade of his career. Had you lived through the 70's and watch Kareem draw away from the fans, media and teammates like the cold prick he is, you might better understand why he is ranked this low.

I have him in my top five, because to me his resume is as good as it gets save Michael and Russell, but I can see where SLAM and Athlon were coming from.

Zydrunas Ilgauskas who was a poor mans rik smits is actually higher than Rik Smits :hammerhead:

[QUOTE=Walduś]reggie miller and nash>> dirk

:roll:[/QUOTE]

Prime Nash > vs prime Dirk =any given day

No Manu or Tony Parker? WTF?

[QUOTE=G.O.A.T]I have all of those players except Kidd ahead of him. Frazier and Reed are obvious. Ask any Knick fan who saw them and they will agree that they are more important than Ewing. Unseld won an MVP and a title, that makes that easy, Hayes and Stockton have better all-time numbers and more all-NBA and all-defensive nods. Dolph Schayes was the best player on a title team and a 12-time all-NBA pick, it would be a crime to have Ewing above him.[/QUOTE]

Well, I disagree, from the footage I've seen of Reed(as well as his numbers), I don't seem him being the player Ewing was.

Individually, Patrick was a much better scorer, a better rebounder and I have yet to hear that Reed was the shot blocker or defensive force that Ewing was. Ewing didn't have teams with the talent that Reed's did when he won, same goes for Frazier.

I saw Stockton play for years, and he wasn't anywhere near the force Ewing was. Stockton had more talent around him than Ewing(especially since he wasn't the best player on his team), yet he didn't win a title either. Ewing came closer than Stockton did and with the exception of '96, Ewing finished higher in MVP voting than Stockton every season from '89-'97. Pretty fair comparison, IMO because their primes were pretty much during the same exact time, same with their peaks.

And as far as all-defensive teams, well, I think it's obvious that Stockton didn't have anywhere near Ewing's impact. Ewing was a dominant shot blocker who anchored one of the greatest defensive teams of all time.

Ewing was a legitimate franchise player, I never viewed Stockton as being that good.

As far as Unseld? Well, that one is really puzzling to me. Unseld was the better passer and I'd give him the edge as a rebounder as well. But the advantage Ewing has as a scorer and defensive player was far greater. Ewing was a guy who could double or triple Unseld's scoring output, draw double teams and anchor a defense.

As far as Hayes, well, your post about Hayes that mentioned him calling the scoring title the most important title as well as all of the losing seasons during his best individual years make it impossible for me to rank him over

[QUOTE]Both Kareem and Hakeem are much more highly regarded online than they are in the circles of 30 somethings that I talk Hoops with. My friend Tim was an editor for Athlon Sports (You've seen their season preview issues and fantasy guides I'm sure) They ranked Kareem at #7 in 1997, Hakeem came in at #16 then.

It's not really laughable when you consider that a lot of fans see Kareem as having wasted an entire decade of his career. Had you lived through the 70's and watch Kareem draw away from the fans, media and teammates like the cold prick he is, you might better understand why he is ranked this low.

I have him in my top five, because to me his resume is as good as it gets save Michael and Russell, but I can see where SLAM and Athlon were coming from.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, I'm just saying that how Kareem acted towards the media shouldn't be a factor when you consider how good he was for so long and what he accomplished on a basketball court.

I find Hakeem to be very underrated. I think that his peak from '93-'95 is pretty comparable to anyone who has played basketball and how many players had so few seasons where their play declined in the playoffs?

Of all the players on this list, the most underrated is Dirk Nowitzki. Having him below players like Reggie Miller and under 50 is just absurd.

[QUOTE=jlauber]I don't really care if someone wants to make a top-500 list, but I can't imagine anyone losing any sleep, or going to therapy, if someone feels the 423rd player should be ranked ahead of the 416th.[/QUOTE]

Are you saying that you might lose some sleep or go to therapy if it were higher rankings? Like 9th and 13th?

oscar at 5 :roll: embarrassing

any top# list is always questionable/arguable, but some of the players and rankings just dont mesh for me. Lovin Shaq at 4 tho.

[QUOTE=SALFORD-RED]I have a hunch that the further removed we get from the 3peat era Shaq and the more his career is evaluated across the entire body of his work Shaq will move down the listings.

I don't think that his legacy will age that well, but could be wrong.[/QUOTE]

I disagree, I think he'll be looked at better as time goes on. A lot of people have the image of old Shaq in their mind, the 39 year old version in his 19th season who misses a lot of games and only plays half of the game when he does play. After he retires, I think that image will fade, just like the image of Hakeem Olajuwon in a Raptors uniform and Ewing in Sonics and Magic jerseys have faded.

When they look back at his career, they'll see 3 consecutive championships and finals MVPs, some of the most dominant seasons, playoff runs and finals series in NBA history and a long career

[QUOTE=G.O.A.T]I have him in my top five, because to me his resume is as good as it gets save Michael and Russell, but I can see where SLAM and Athlon were coming from.[/QUOTE]


??? i have a problem with the "because his resume is as good as..."

the list of the greatest players of all time is very different of a list of the best career of all time.

all time achievement overrate players like being a 2 time DPOY like Howard and being the half of a defender of David Robinson who has only one DPOY award.

i find it absurd that omeone who get another title could move on this list. kobe could win 2 more rings, he would never be as good as Michael Jordan, it's absurd like those pseudo sports journalists.

Stockton would have a lot more all nba first team apparition if Magic wasn't there. does it change his level of play? of course not.

:facepalm @ #433

[COLOR="White"]it's a joke i don't even know who #433 is because i didn't scan that far down[/COLOR]

Kobe at 10? Hulk Hogan where are you???

Monta Ellis at 353!!!! Psh get out of here!

Shaq at #4 ahad of Magic, Kareem, Duncan, Bird and Kobe?:roll: :oldlol:

I think the list Bill Simmons put together is much better.

[QUOTE=caliman]Shaq at #4 ahad of Magic, Kareem, Duncan, Bird and Kobe?:roll: :oldlol:

I think the list Bill Simmons put together is much better.[/QUOTE]

Shaq has an argument over every one of those players except Kareem.

Looking at the list, (just the early parts) I'm surprised Connie Hawkins (56), Jack Twyman (61) and David Thompson (63) are listed so high. I've never seen them this high on any list. Jack is ranked higher than a few other sgs from his era (Sharman and Arzin) that are always considered better than him. I always pictured Twyman along with the other swings of that era like Richie Guerin and Cliff Hagan. Unless there is something I don't know about Twyman.


The same can be said about Bob Dandridge and Bob Love at 91 and 92. Another Bob, Bobby Jones has an argument as a better player or at least ranked close to them. He's 159.

[QUOTE=L.Kizzle]Looking at the list, (just the early parts) I'm surprised Connie Hawkins (56), Jack Twyman (61) and David Thompson (63) are listed so high. I've never seen them this high on any list. Jack is ranked higher than a few other sgs from his era (Sharman and Arzin) that are always considered better than him. I always pictured Twyman along with the other swings of that era like Richie Guerin and Cliff Hagan. Unless there is something I don't know about Twyman.


The same can be said about Bob Dandridge and Bob Love at 91 and 92. Another Bob, Bobby Jones has an argument as a better player or at least ranked close to them. He's 159.[/QUOTE]

Pretty bad list in general. Maravich gets overrated yet again, he's ahead of many players who were better players and had better careers than him.

[QUOTE=ShaqAttack3234]Pretty bad list in general. Maravich gets overrated yet again, he's ahead of many players who were better players and had better careers than him.[/QUOTE]
The biggest is Walt Bellamy. Hey, at least he's not as high as he was in SLAMs top 75. Dude was ranked at 34.

Kareem is way too low.

this list is biased against 3-point specialists (see Glen Rice and Allan Houston)
was this list computer generated?

Jason Kidd is ranked WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY too high.

My man Derek Fisher in at 370:bowdown:

[QUOTE=AJ2k8]My man Derek Fisher in at 370:bowdown:[/QUOTE]
Should not be above John Starks.

[QUOTE=L.Kizzle]Should not be above John Starks.[/QUOTE]
Don't even think it's worth critiquing the list to be honest, would love to see their criteria for the list ordering because on first glance it has some amazing flaws.

Edit: Have they got anything that explains this list or how they've ordered it?

Luke Walton @ 242 ?!?!?! WTF

[COLOR="White"]Hah made you check[/COLOR]

[QUOTE=AJ2k8]Don't even think it's worth critiquing the list to be honest, would love to see their criteria for the list ordering because on first glance it has some amazing flaws.

Edit: Have they got anything that explains this list or how they've ordered it?[/QUOTE]
First, players had to have 5 seasons under there belt. A whole bunch of SLAM writers, this list actually goes back to the SLAM top 50 from like a little over a year ago. They ranked it like any other list they said titles, All-NBA teams, All-Stars, stats, awards, ect. The list was cut down from 650.

:facepalm

btw for everyone wondering. this list was made right before the 2009 playoffs

at the time i would agree that kobe was boarderline top 10

but my god.... it seems every single other player is ranked wrong

Well at least they didn't try to get cute and put someone other than Jordan at #1.

[QUOTE=UwishUhadWall]Well at least they didn't try to get cute and put someone other than Jordan at #1.[/QUOTE]


how would that be cute.

kareem has just as much claim to top spot for career achivements

wilt has more of a case for individual statistical dominance

russell has more of a case for leading teams to championships

magic has a better case for making others better

kobe has a better case for being the most perfected skill wise


jordan isnt that far ahead of those guys

You ask how would that be cute, lol let me tell you something youngster, first of all there is no list of general greatest players that can be accurately put together, secondly, it should be according the respective positions they were registered in, how can something come out of your mouth as saying kobes skill are more perfect than jordan's, come on kiddo where the hell did that come from???

[QUOTE=griffmoney1784]how would that be cute.

kareem has just as much claim to top spot for career achivements

wilt has more of a case for individual statistical dominance

russell has more of a case for leading teams to championships

magic has a better case for making others better

kobe has a better case for being the most perfected skill wise


jordan isnt that far ahead of those guys[/QUOTE]

As often as I disagree with griffmoney, he has a solid point here. MJ has a case as the GOAT, BUT, he does not have a LOCK on it.

IS Horace Grant too high or too low?

1. Michael Jordan
2. Wilt Chamberlain
3. Bill Russell
4. Shaquille O'Neal
5. Oscar Robertson
6. Magic Johnson
7. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
8. Tim Duncan
9. Larry Bird
10. Hakeem Olajuwon
11. Jerry West
12. Kobe Bryant
13. Elgin Baylor
14. Bob Petit
15. Moses Malone
16. Julius Erving
17. John Havlicek
18. Karl Malone
19. Charles Barkley
20. Lebron James

FIXED!

[QUOTE=L.Kizzle]Since some folks were asking for the list, here you go. SLAM doesn't have it online so here it is.


95. Dikembe Mutombo
[SIZE="4"][B]96. Pau Gasol[/B][/SIZE]
97. Tracy McGrady
98. Grant Hill
99. Vince Carter
100. Buck Williams[/QUOTE]
:lol

The list is flawed in so many ways. Have no idea where to start...

[QUOTE=Human Error]The list is flawed in so many ways. Have no idea where to start...[/QUOTE]
Where is it flawed at??