The Top 100 Greatest NBA Players Of All Time According To ISH

[QUOTE=Richie2k6]You're just biased and like to overexaggerate. I can't have a logical argument with you. It's that simple. You're just not worth taking seriously. You don't like a player, so you bash them and underrate them, a.k.a immaturity. That's why. That's all there really is to it.[/QUOTE]
yes i did overexaggerate...but it has nothing to do with me not liking him because I do like him. I just don't think he is as good as everyone makes him out to be.

[QUOTE=-primetime-]yes i did overexaggerate...but it has nothing to do with me not liking him because I do like him. I just don't think he is as good as everyone makes him out to be.[/QUOTE]
I've given you tons and tons and tons of reasons, facts and statistics proving otherwise, yet you refuse to care. That's why I'm just flat out done trying to get it through your head, because you won't change your mind no matter what anybody says.

[QUOTE=Richie2k6]I've given you tons and tons and tons of reasons, facts and statistics proving otherwise, yet you refuse to care. That's why I'm just flat out done trying to get it through your head, because you won't change your mind no matter what anybody says.[/QUOTE]
you are just as guilty of that as I am...

[QUOTE=LBJ 4 MVP]Ben Wallace should not even be near this list.[/QUOTE]
Thats what I said..

[QUOTE=-primetime-]you are just as guilty of that as I am...[/QUOTE]
But you've yet to give me reasons as to why Iverson isn't top 50, or why Dirk should be higher than him, or that he's a ball hog. I've countered all those arguments with better ones.

So how am I the one in denial here? I don't get it.

[QUOTE]Wow, are you serious? There was someone who made a "New Top 50", and wrote an article, and put Gary Payton in. And GP was also selected into the "Next 10". I doubt that Gary Payton wouldn't be in.[/QUOTE]

"Someone"? there is "someone" who thinks just about everything. And i nthe "next 10" im guessing you mean TNTs thing. It was a 5 minute clip where they asked TNT guys who they wanted to add. Only 2 of the voters from the first list were involved. 14 people total most of them tnt/tbs announcers. The first list was something like 35 players/coaches and then some list of longtime media types. Off the top of my head the only people id expect a similar group to possibly put payton over...

Sam Jones, Earl Monroe, and perhaps Billy Cunningham or Dave Bing. But with Duncan, Kidd, KG, AI, Payton, Kobe, Nique, and Dennis Johnson(especially now) also getting votes...I dont think Gary would make it. Duncan and Kobe are probably the only ones to rise far enough for the legends and such to be forced to give them the kind of votes that would remove some of the first guys.

Besides the next 10 was just that....the NEXT 10. Says nothing of them thinking he belongs over the first 50.

[QUOTE]There's reasons he wasn't that high. And I can understand them, but you're just too narrow minded and have been after Elvin Hayes for a while.[/QUOTE]

There are reasons for just about everything. Doesnt make them good reasons. Hayes was flat out more accomplished at the things generally used. Numbers, accomplishments, and even a ring with 3 trips to the finals in his prime. He(like Reed, Cowens, and Unseld) just suffers from peaking in the 70s which is(on these lists) the most disrespected and unknown era. 50s players are pioneers who get credit and often a higher ranking than they may deserve. 60s playersl ike Wilt, Russell, Oscar, and so on had feats too great to ignore. 80s players were in the Ls golden age and 90s guys are those ISH remembers. The 70s? Just left out. Transitional decade. And its a shame.

Besides...any critism of Hayes would have to center around defensive complaints or his personality and neither could be said of Cowens who is also below that aberration from 24-28.

And ive said it before and ill say it again...you are the last person who should speak on anyone being narrow minded. The mere fact you have often used voting results to determine defensive ability at the sake of considering on the floor issues screams of it. You have actually told me before that you choose to use such things because its objective and not open to interpretation and so on. Making an effort to remove thought and analyzation at the sake of convenience doesnt seem open minded to me. Youre on a short list of people(online or not) more argumentative and repetitive when you think you have a point than I am.

Open minded people dont argue for days at a time and claim the other side knows its wrong if they want to stop(as you do...). The list of open minded people on ISH is short. very short. I am not on it and neither are you.

[QUOTE=Glove_20]I'm glad Payton got around the spot he deserved.

KJ was too low.



A lot of minor changes here and there. But a pretty good list overall[/QUOTE]
Where would you put KJ, from players #1-#45 it's only arguable with about 5 that he could go over, but then it's players #47-#100 that could be over him, a bunch actually.


I'm a big KJ fan, but he's has gone from terribly underrated to terribly overrated on this forum.

[QUOTE=Richie2k6]But you've yet to give me reasons as to why Iverson isn't top 50, or why Dirk should be higher than him, or that he's a ball hog. I've countered all those arguments with better ones.

So how am I the one in denial here? I don't get it.[/QUOTE]
Iverson may be better about that stuff now...but I can remember a few years back when (even though he is good) no team would want him on thier team.

I say he is a ball hog and you show me a high assist%....but what you fail to realize is that the reason he has so many assists is because he is a ball hog, if that makes any sense....he always has the ball so 10 -12 times a game he might actually pass it to someone and that player may have the strange luxery of scoring. Most of the time he just takes it to the hoop himself and throw up what ever...

when you have the ball 24/7 you are gonna get assists...simple as that



now like I said....he may be different now on the nugs...I am still looking forward to seeing how that turns out....(i am betting not good)

[QUOTE=L.Kizzle]Where would you put KJ, from players #1-#45 it's only arguable with about 5 that he could go over, but then it's players #47-#100 that could be over him, a bunch actually.


I'm a big KJ fan, but he's has gone from terribly underrated to terribly overrated on this forum.[/QUOTE]
man I agree

what the hell is KJ doing in front of Dirk?...that is seriously ridiculous and was infuenced purely through Glove 20.

KJ is not top 50

Would you guys rate KJ over Reggie Miller???

Am I the only one person that thinks this is the most accurate top 100 list I've seen to date on any site? I mean honestly, it has some flaws here and there but mainly it's a well done list.

[QUOTE]Would you guys rate KJ over Reggie Miller???[/QUOTE]

Without thinking twice.

[QUOTE=Los Angeles]Am I the only one person that thinks this is the most accurate top 100 list I've seen to date on any site? I mean honestly, it has some flaws here and there but mainly it's a well done list.



Without thinking twice.[/QUOTE]
I don't have any top 100 lists to compare it to

link?

[QUOTE]I don't have any top 100 lists to compare it to

link?[/QUOTE]

Sites like ESPN, and SI have done a few I'm pretty sure...

[URL="http://motownsportsrevival.blogspot.com/2006/12/top-50-basketball-players-of-all-time.html"]http://motownsportsrevival.blogspot.com/2006/12/top-50-basketball-players-of-all-time.html[/URL]

Here's one list I found, top 50 of all-time.

[QUOTE=Kblaze8855]"Someone"? there is "someone" who thinks just about everything. And i nthe "next 10" im guessing you mean TNTs thing. It was a 5 minute clip where they asked TNT guys who they wanted to add. Only 2 of the voters from the first list were involved. 14 people total most of them tnt/tbs announcers. The first list was something like 35 players/coaches and then some list of longtime media types. Off the top of my head the only people id expect a similar group to possibly put payton over...

Sam Jones, Earl Monroe, and perhaps Billy Cunningham or Dave Bing. But with Duncan, Kidd, KG, AI, Payton, Kobe, Nique, and Dennis Johnson(especially now) also getting votes...I dont think Gary would make it. Duncan and Kobe are probably the only ones to rise far enough for the legends and such to be forced to give them the kind of votes that would remove some of the first guys.

Besides the next 10 was just that....the NEXT 10. Says nothing of them thinking he belongs over the first 50.

[/quote]


I've only seen 1 article that remade a "New Top 50", and that one article had Gary Payton in it. Anything else? Show me one that doesn't. And then you have a chance at being right on "I doubt if they made a New Top 50 right now, GP would be in". And all other Top 50 lists I have seen have had GP in it. 100%. So saying "I doubt GP would get voted in" is a pure example of stupidity, and I have backed up that he would get voted with other articles (after all, its just a vote) and all you have said is what you think. And sorry, that doesn't matter in votes.

So try again.



[QUOTE]There are reasons for just about everything. Doesnt make them good reasons. Hayes was flat out more accomplished at the things generally used. Numbers, accomplishments, and even a ring with 3 trips to the finals in his prime. He(like Reed, Cowens, and Unseld) just suffers from peaking in the 70s which is(on these lists) the most disrespected and unknown era. 50s players are pioneers who get credit and often a higher ranking than they may deserve. 60s playersl ike Wilt, Russell, Oscar, and so on had feats too great to ignore. 80s players were in the Ls golden age and 90s guys are those ISH remembers. The 70s? Just left out. Transitional decade. And its a shame.

70s players ARE overrated. There is a reason why they are ignored. Why do you think they were called the "Dark Ages of the NBA"


[/QUOTE]


70s players ARE overrated. There is a reason why they are ignored. Why do you think they were called the "Dark Ages of the NBA". And Cowens isn't that good either.


[QUOTE]And ive said it before and ill say it again...you are the last person who should speak on anyone being narrow minded. The mere fact you have often used voting results to determine defensive ability at the sake of considering on the floor issues screams of it. You have actually told me before that you choose to use such things because its objective and not open to interpretation and so on. Making an effort to remove thought and analyzation at the sake of convenience doesnt seem open minded to me. Youre on a short list of people(online or not) more argumentative and repetitive when you think you have a point than I am.[/QUOTE]

I don't base it all on defensive votes, it was just an argument. And when the difference is so high, its worth mentioning, it not like it was a diff. of like 5-10 votes. When there is a difference of 100+ votes vs. 0 votes, its definately worth mentioning, and you'd be ignorant not to think so.


And once again, I am one of the most open-minded on ISH. I change my mind all the time based on arguments. When we were doing this list, I started to argue Payton in after 25, and the argument was Payton vs. Reed. I argued for Payton, but after a while, I realized Reed belongs over Payton, and admit it.

[QUOTE]70s players ARE overrated. There is a reason why they are ignored. [/QUOTE]

Mostly because the lack of exposure to todays generation.
And I agree, I don't see how I can leave Gary Payton off the top 50 list.

[QUOTE=L.Kizzle]Where would you put KJ, from players #1-#45 it's only arguable with about 5 that he could go over, but then it's players #47-#100 that could be over him, a bunch actually.


I'm a big KJ fan, but he's has gone from terribly underrated to terribly overrated on this forum.[/QUOTE]

KJ is Top 40, and the things KJ has done only the greatest have done. Things like lead their teams to WCF past good team's like Magic's Lakers, or be the leader in turning around franchises, or bring out the best from his teammates, those are things only the very great do. He is a PG, initiates the offense, so PGs are rated high anyways. And only him and Magic are by themselves on 20/10/50%, the 3 most important categories for a PG.

KJ is Top 40 for sure

[QUOTE=Los Angeles]Mostly because the lack of exposure to todays generation.
And I agree, I don't see how I can leave Gary Payton off the top 50 list.[/QUOTE]
No one but KBlaze does. All Top 50 lists I have seen so far in my life have had Gary Payton there.

But somehow KBlaze can say, "I doubt Payton makes Top 50 if they revised"

I mean, I say "Payton would surely be in Top 50", and I have other articles that can back my claim, and the majority everywhere. KBlaze, its just himself. And thi s is a "voting" issue too, so opinion is all that matters...And the opinion seems clear

[QUOTE=Los Angeles]Sites like ESPN, and SI have done a few I'm pretty sure...

[URL="http://motownsportsrevival.blogspot.com/2006/12/top-50-basketball-players-of-all-time.html"]http://motownsportsrevival.blogspot.com/2006/12/top-50-basketball-players-of-all-time.html[/URL]

Here's one list I found, top 50 of all-time.[/QUOTE]
oh god that list is awful

yeah I see what you mean now

[quote]Iverson may be better about that stuff now...but I can remember a few years back when (even though he is good) no team would want him on thier team.[/quote]
Of course there were teams that want him. You think teams don't want Artest jusut because he has trouble with the law? You think teams don't want Nash just because he's 34? You think teams don't want KObe just because he demands the ball to score a lot? Of course teams wanted him. You can't tell me all other 29 teams in the NBA did not have any interest at him at all. If you think that, you're just lying to yourself.
[quote]
I say he is a ball hog and you show me a high assist%....but what you fail to realize is that the reason he has so many assists is because he is a ball hog, if that makes any sense....he always has the ball so 10 -12 times a game he might actually pass it to someone and that player may have the strange luxery of scoring. [/quote]
And I say you completely ignore everything I say and overlap it with your own opinions. How many times do I have to tell you?
[quote=Richie2k6]
A ball hog is somebody who has a me-first mentality and attitude, and does foolish things with the ball when it could easily be given up to a teammate. A ball hog prefers not to pass by their own decision. Iverson was not a ball hog. It was his JOB to handle the ball a lot and score. Larry Brown TOLD HIM he was supposed to score and handle the ball - it was part of their offensive gameplan. Let Iverson score. Same with today's Lakers. Kobe is supposed to handle the rock and is supposed to score. That doesn't make him a ball hog. It's his duty to go out there and score night after night. Iverson was doing his job, not hogging. There's a difference. Are you going to call Marcus Camby a rebound hog next? That's his job, like Iverson and Kobe were to score. Ball hogs and lead offensive weapons are two different things, and many people don't understand that. Sure, everybody makes a couple of selfish moves a game. Hell even Jason Kidd, the most unselfish player in the NBA, pulls up for shots when he could have easily passed it for a better look, though that's rare. Everybody has a time where they don't pass and make a not-so-good decision.[/quote]
[quote=Richie2k6]
A coach could trust him to facilitate the ball, and he would. His mentality has changed from 5 years ago. He's gone from a scorer, to a scorer and playmaker at the same time. He could go out there and get you a 25/7 game, or he could go out there and get you a 20/10 game. People say he's a ball hog and that his assists only come because he handles the ball a lot? Wrong. Again, if you were to watch tape of his gameplay, you'd see that his assists don't just come because he passes it to people randomly. He's one the of the best penetrate n' kickers in the NBA. He's always dribbling with his head up to see the open man. He's become very unselfish since he's come to Denver. In fact, George Karl said out of his own mouth, that he has to tell Iverson to shoot MORE since he's become TOO unselfish. He's matured as a player and he knows his role on the Nuggets and that it's not to shoot 25 shots per game. His FGA's has gone down from, what, 25 to 18? He's become a great passer and playmaker, and that shows through his numbers and his skill at passing itself. He's proven he can do both at the same time, when he put up 44/15 against the Suns a while back, and averaged 31.2PPG, 10.0APG, 2.2 SPG, 90% FT shooting, 47% shooting from the field and 41% shooting from beyond the arc while averaging almost all 48 MPG. (47.8) in a 5 game series against the Pistons in the '05 Playoffs. That proves that when he's on, he can score with the best of them, and efficiently as well.[/quote]
I keep telling you these things over and over and over and you don't care, you just keep going by what you think and completely ignore any facts I have to say. I tell you time and time again, he's not a ball hog and hasn't been since the late 90's.

Great Job! thanks L.Kizzle that was a ton of work you put and it's much appreciated... looking over the list there is going to be placings that one poster feels need to be changed dependent on his views but over all that list is darn good with most players in the ball park of where they belong

[QUOTE=Glove_20]KJ is Top 40, and the things KJ has done only the greatest have done. Things like lead their teams to WCF past good team's like Magic's Lakers, or be the leader in turning around franchises, or bring out the best from his teammates, those are things only the very great do. He is a PG, initiates the offense, so PGs are rated high anyways. And only him and Magic are by themselves on 20/10/50%, the 3 most important categories for a PG.

KJ is Top 40 for sure[/QUOTE]
KJ being as top 40 player today means he was a top 30 player when the NBA at 50 list was created 11 years ago. Why wasn't he on the list or even mentioned with the snubs (Nique, McAdoo, English) around the 50 greatest times. How is he not in the hall of fame if he is a top 40 player All-Time. He has only been nominated once for the Hall and was turned down, (that was in 2006) and he wasn't even on the ballot this past seasons Hall of Fame induction.


I'm not saying KJ wasn't a great player, but I think you and G-Matt overrate him a bit. OK, the numbers, him being one of only 3 to do ___ you post that every time we bring up a KJ discussion, but that doesn't really make him a top 40 player at #46.


Tim Hardawy took a team to the Conference Finals, been to the playoff many times with GSW and the Heat. Has just as much accolades as KJ (actually has more), guys played in the same era, yet he is #94 and KJ is #46 and you think he should be higher. Sidney Moncrief has more accolades, a better defender, and about equal efficent scorer as Kev and took his team to the Conference Finals three times, yet he's #64 and KJ is #46.

Thanks again to L.Kizzle and everyone else involved in making this list--especially to those who presented insightful arguments and information. Thanks to Statman32, as well, who began this list. In the original post suggesting such an idea, I recall, that TheAnswer supported the project from the beginning, too.

I had a lot of fun and learned a few things. My first post on ISH was to vote and to explain the vote for Bill Russell at #1. This list was the primary reason I joined ISH, and I missed maybe 1 or 2 rounds total. A few were making rude accusations that L.Kizzle's recommendations were determining the list, but it's obvious this list doesn't resemble a personal list L.Kizzle would make. Same with me--I disagreed with this list from day one.

I think this list is off in more ways than I wish to say, but I don't think that's important, either. I enjoyed the process, and everyone who is on the list deserved to at least be considered for it. That said, I especially objected in the beginning to Bill Russell being ranked below fellow Celtic legend Larry Bird, as well as Magic Johnson. I believe I made a comment, at the time, about Red Auerbach rolling over in his grave. Julius Erving over teammate Moses Malone was another early and noticeable mistake. I'd change other things, too, but these are selections where I don't see solid arguments on the other side.

From David Robinson to Gary Payton, the rankings seem to have gone rather askew. L.Kizzle and others complained during the Pippen and Drexler selections about voters not giving arguments for their votes, but, unfortunately, that trend continued and eventually there were rounds where little to no arguments were given for any votes. The bias in favor of 90's players and today's players--and, to an extent, 80s players--continued, as well.

Kblaze said 70s players were the most neglected, but I think it was the pioneer players from the 50s and 40s. Pete Maravich and Artis Gilmore are too high, for example. Bob McAdoo over Dolph Schayes seems odd. The handful of 40s/50s players on this list deserve to be on, and I swear I was the only one at times giving them credit for being "pioneers." And, on skill and athleticism, seeing how Jim Pollard didn't make this list, I don’t see who of them were overrated or shouldn't have made it. A few more should have made it, I think, like Pollard and maybe Vern Mikkelsen, Ed Macauley, George Yardley, and maybe some more.

Who do I think shouldn't be on this list? I said as much about Penny Hardaway and Tom Chambers already. Maybe I'd take Shawn Kemp, Mark Aguirre, Mark Price, Connie Hawkins, Ben Wallace, Ray Allen, Paul Pierce, Vince Carter, and Pete Maravich off the list, too. I'd have to think more about it. Modern players like Vince Carter seem tricky to me for an all-time list.

Anyhow, I do feel good about the list overall, which has little to with whether I agree with it precisely. Comparing it to similar lists, like Elliott Kalb's 50 list (that might be the list Glove was referring to about Gary Payton), the Association for Professional Basketball Research's list of the 100 Greatest Pros of the 20th Century, the NBA's 50 list and TNT's next 10, and Slam's 75 list… I think ISH's list fairs well. And, there were some good arguments and insights provided along the way.

[QUOTE]I've only seen 1 article that remade a "New Top 50", and that one article had Gary Payton in it. Anything else? Show me one that doesn't. And then you have a chance at being right on "I doubt if they made a New Top 50 right now, GP would be in". And all other Top 50 lists I have seen have had GP in it. 100%. So saying "I doubt GP would get voted in" is a pure example of stupidity, and I have backed up that he would get voted with other articles (after all, its just a vote) and all you have said is what you think. And sorry, that doesn't matter in votes.[/QUOTE]

Maybe you didnt get it the first time...but I said:

"Get the same group of legends, coaches, and longtime media members to vote for a top 50 again and I doubt Payton even makes it. Maybe he should...but id doubt it. I mean really..."

So of what relevance is a list made by any group aside from the one I mentioned? The only list I can even think of of this type is slams top 75. Slam I see has Gary 47th but it was years ago and Duncan wasnt even listed top 50 yet and neither was Kobe or some others who have since risen. So its not really an issue of right now.

My point to begin with was that Gary(unlike someone like Duncan or even Kobe) has not dont anything since the first vote that would clearly put him over a lot of the first list. My point wasnt eve nthat Payton SHOULDNT be top 50. In fact I said maybe he should. But he has not had one of those careers that just shoots him up the ladder the way Duncan and Kobe has. He lacks the MVPs and titles and even individual things that generally get people put up high in rankings. My point was that the list of people he may have surpassed wasnt as long as the list of people who probbaly need to be added. Not that he flat out doesnt deserve it. Ive been saying for a long time that once you get to like #30 its all the same basic level for a long time.


[QUOTE]70s players ARE overrated. There is a reason why they are ignored. Why do you think they were called the "Dark Ages of the NBA"[/QUOTE]

How are 70s players overrated? Where is this big group of people who rates them highly? Kareem is about the only 70s player who gets love for what he did then. Besides....half the 70s greats proved they could play in the 80s too. Hayes as I said was on an all star team with Bill Russell and was a 23/11 all star with Bird and Magic. He was all NBA first team and playing in the finals the season Bird was drafted in fact. bird just returned to school for a year.




[QUOTE]And Cowens isn't that good either. [/QUOTE]

MVP, 2 time champ, 20/15/5, defense playing god of hustle isnt that good? Now that is just disrespect.



[QUOTE]I don't base it all on defensive votes, it was just an argument. And when the difference is so high, its worth mentioning, it not like it was a diff. of like 5-10 votes. When there is a difference of 100+ votes vs. 0 votes, its definately worth mentioning, and you'd be ignorant not to think so.[/QUOTE]

It never fails to amuse me how someone who argued so much against Nash deserving MVP can argue so strongly in favor of others because they got votes. Votes only matter to you(and ot be fair..to anyone) when they support your opinion.

[QUOTE]And once again, I am one of the most open-minded on ISH. I change my mind all the time based on arguments. When we were doing this list, I started to argue Payton in after 25, and the argument was Payton vs. Reed. I argued for Payton, but after a while, I realized Reed belongs over Payton, and admit it.[/QUOTE]

Damn near anyone who has to say they are open minded isnt open minded. Its nice how that works out. Kinda like people who say they arent racist or follow "No offense" with something clearly offensive. I mean really...nobody who has said this:

"You just cant argue with my strong points"

...when someone just decides not to devote hours to an argument should even be mentioning an open mind.

Ive seen you argue for 2-3 hundred posts repeating the same basic thing over and over and over calling people stupid and ignorant to disagree and open minded people just dont act like that. Nothing wrong with not being open minded. Im not either. Neither of us are particulary accepting of opinions we disagree with. But at least I can be real about it.

[QUOTE=BULLS]Actually, the 70's is widely considered to be one of the weakest, if not the weakest era in league history. This has been mentioned by people who actually think the 60's was a strong era.[/QUOTE]

Prove it with a link then.

I like the list just the way it is, because people voted for it. The people who seem to complain the most never seemed to be there to vote when it counted. The best thing about the list was not the arguments for or against certain players going to high or low or whatever, but the gaining of knowledge about players that may have been forgotten had people not been there to explain why they belonged on the list.

[QUOTE=BULLS]I don't need to prove obvious facts to kids like you. If you fail to understand undisputed facts, that's your problem.

The majority of basketball fans consider the 50's, 60's, and 70's to be very weak.[/QUOTE]

Prove it with some facts to back up your argument BULLS, I thought it would be easy for you to do. Everyone else seems to do it, why can't you?

[QUOTE=Richie2k6]Of course there were teams that want him. You think teams don't want Artest jusut because he has trouble with the law? You think teams don't want Nash just because he's 34? You think teams don't want KObe just because he demands the ball to score a lot? Of course teams wanted him. You can't tell me all other 29 teams in the NBA did not have any interest at him at all. If you think that, you're just lying to yourself.[/QUOTE]
you are right...there are plenty of teams that would have taken him...but I can tell you that Dallas wouldn't have taken him during the Nash days if he was given to us for free.
[QUOTE=Richie2k6]And I say you completely ignore everything I say and overlap it with your own opinions. How many times do I have to tell you?[/QUOTE]
well what the hell am I supposed to do?.....I will tell you my opinion and then you tell me yours....that is what i am doing and IMO alot of assits doesn't necessarily mean he isn't a ball hog.
[QUOTE=Richie2k6]I keep telling you these things over and over and over and you don't care, you just keep going by what you think and completely ignore any facts I have to say. I tell you time and time again, he's not a ball hog and hasn't been since the late 90's.[/QUOTE]
BS...I read your so called "facts"

I believe that there was a time when Iverson was all about himself.....If that was thier game plan then fine...I guess you got me but it sure doesn't look like it worked...

I really think 5-10 posters that are considered "Knowledgable" by the majority, and have a good sense of history, should start this and vote on players again.

Good idea? It will give us a more accurate picture.

Guys like Kizzle, D-Fence, etc.

[QUOTE=BULLS]Facts don't need to be proven. They are already facts.[/QUOTE]

Ok, so you'll have no problem posting some facts here for everybody's benefit, right?

im just glad spencer haywood, adrian dantly, and artis gilmore made this list. these dudes get over looked miserably all the time.

[QUOTE=Kblaze8855]Maybe you didnt get it the first time...but I said:

"Get the same group of legends, coaches, and longtime media members to vote for a top 50 again and I doubt Payton even makes it. Maybe he should...but id doubt it. I mean really..."

So of what relevance is a list made by any group aside from the one I mentioned? The only list I can even think of of this type is slams top 75. Slam I see has Gary 47th but it was years ago and Duncan wasnt even listed top 50 yet and neither was Kobe or some others who have since risen. So its not really an issue of right now.
[/quote]

And what do you have to show that backs up that Payton wouldn't make it if they voted again. The evidence I have that he will is 1st, common sense, 2nd, most articles written agree. So what do you have on your side? Just that you "think"?

[QUOTE=KBlaze8855]
My point to begin with was that Gary(unlike someone like Duncan or even Kobe) has not dont anything since the first vote that would clearly put him over a lot of the first list. My point wasnt eve nthat Payton SHOULDNT be top 50. In fact I said maybe he should. But he has not had one of those careers that just shoots him up the ladder the way Duncan and Kobe has. He lacks the MVPs and titles and even individual things that generally get people put up high in rankings. My point was that the list of people he may have surpassed wasnt as long as the list of people who probbaly need to be added. Not that he flat out doesnt deserve it. Ive been saying for a long time that once you get to like #30 its all the same basic level for a long time.

[/QUOTE]

You're right. He doesn't have the MVPs and wasn't that big of a part on his championship, but his individual greatness was so high he should be in. He outplayed players like John Stockton when it counted, and Stockton was in the early 20s, so I don't see how he could be close to Stockton. And he was a PG, PGs did a lot more things than your average SG. He was also a 2-Way Player, and easily a Top 5 2 Way-Guard, TOP 5, and that counts scoring and defense, the 2 most important categories when comparing all players. He really had no hole in his game, and was very good individually. Add to that the team success he enjoyed, Top 6 in Assists, Record 9 Straight Defensive 1st, and many other little things, he has a good case to be around 28.


[QUOTE=KBlaze8855]How are 70s players overrated? Where is this big group of people who rates them highly? Kareem is about the only 70s player who gets love for what he did then. Besides....half the 70s greats proved they could play in the 80s too. Hayes as I said was on an all star team with Bill Russell and was a 23/11 all star with Bird and Magic. He was all NBA first team and playing in the finals the season Bird was drafted in fact. bird just returned to school for a year.
[/QUOTE]

Its called the ABA. The ABA peaked in the 70s KBlaze8855. The players still playing in the NBA didn't have nearly as much competetion as they did in the 80s, or even 60s. With less competition, players had better stats, defenses were weaker, and it was easier to win championships, get more awards, and I can just go on with the affect that another league can have on the NBA. ABA was the reason the 70s weren't that great, and if you call 70s equal to any other era, you are really overrating the 70s.

Also, basketball is getting more popular and competition therefore is generally increasing with time, thats something modern players will always have over past players...




[QUOTE]MVP, 2 time champ, 20/15/5, defense playing god of hustle isnt that good? Now that is just disrespect.
[/QUOTE]

Don't overrate and just look at awards/championships/stats in the [b]70s[/b], I already explained why everything was inflated for them. Including stats, titles, and awards.



[QUOTE=KBlaze8855]It never fails to amuse me how someone who argued so much against Nash deserving MVP can argue so strongly in favor of others because they got votes. Votes only matter to you(and ot be fair..to anyone) when they support your opinion.
[/QUOTE]

If Nash was the clear cut MVP winner, you wouldn't be seeing me argue against that, and he would be really THAT good (Magic good). But he wasn't. And also, votes aren't everything, they are 1 argument, analysis is still neccesary.

[quote=KBlaze8855]
Damn near anyone who has to say they are open minded isnt open minded. Its nice how that works out. Kinda like people who say they arent racist or follow "No offense" with something clearly offensive. I mean really...nobody who has said this:

"You just cant argue with my strong points"

...when someone just decides not to devote hours to an argument should even be mentioning an open mind.

Ive seen you argue for 2-3 hundred posts repeating the same basic thing over and over and over calling people stupid and ignorant to disagree and open minded people just dont act like that. Nothing wrong with not being open minded. Im not either. Neither of us are particulary accepting of opinions we disagree with. But at least I can be real about it.[/QUOTE]


Most have called me Open-Minded, you are one of the few that hasn't.

[QUOTE=BULLS]That's because you don't believe in a GOAT, and you believe that every one of the ten greatest players to ever step on the hardwood are equally as good as one another. You based your top 10 off the ISH list, which basically means that you consider Oscar Robertson and Bill Russell to be just as good as Magic Johnson and Michael Jordan. :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:[/QUOTE]

So what? They are all great in their own ways, what's wrong with saying it? You don't have a problem letting your opinion be known, so it's fair for me to do the same. By the way, if you are going to say I said something, I'd appreciate an actual quote from the pages of this forum.

[quote]well what the hell am I supposed to do?.....I will tell you my opinion and then you tell me yours....that is what i am doing and IMO alot of assits doesn't necessarily mean he isn't a ball hog.[/quote]
Ugh... did you even read what I said properly?
[quote]BS...I read your so called "facts"

[b]I believe that there was a time when Iverson was all about himself[/b].....If that was thier game plan then fine...I guess you got me but it sure doesn't look like it worked...[/quote]
Yeah, like I said, his rookie year till t he late 90's.

[QUOTE=Richie2k6]Ugh... did you even read what I said properly?
[/QUOTE]
yeah you said I keep overlapping your facts with my opinions...

well?...like I said, what else can I do?

[QUOTE=BULLS]You are entitled to your own opinion, just understand that your opinion is laughable. They are all great in their own ways, but some are greater than others. There is a reason why Jordan won 6 titles in the only 6 years he was fully available during the most difficult era in league history, and a reason why Oscar couldn't win jack until being paired up with a top 5 center of all-time, despite playing in the weakest era in league history. Oscar was simply not as good as Jordan. Same goes for everyone else.

You just need to understand that there is a definite, clear-cut GOAT. His name is Michael Jeffrey Jordan.[/QUOTE]

Why?

Kizzle - good work on this list. Thanks. I enjoyed he reading especially the top 50 threads which I followed closely. I didn't contribute much over the past months because my ball knowledge only goes back 15 years of NBA watching. (hmm... not that a similar lack stopped [I]some [/I]of the other posters!) Ultimately the list is subjective, and it seems, somewhat overly dominated by players with a recent public history. (For example, a player such as Gilbert Arenas deserves no mention whatsoever in a top 100 list of all time. He is justifyably left off.) All in all well done. Perhaps missing is Bill Laimbeer?

( Oh yes, one final thing. BULLS your comments are not very intelligent nor useful. Sigh. Ignore continues.)

[QUOTE]And what do you have to show that backs up that Payton wouldn't make it if they voted again. The evidence I have that he will is 1st, common sense, 2nd, most articles written agree. So what do you have on your side? Just that you "think"?[/QUOTE]

There is no evidence he would. None. How is a list made by people like us(say a magazine staff) or a list made by a couple others gonna show what the NBA voters would say? As if such things would make a guy like Wes unseld(a voter) decide he needed to remove Jerry Lucas for payton or something. Payton being top 50 isnt common sense. There are people ISH has listed in the 80s and 90s who were considered equal to or better than him in their primes.

You have 50 legends to begin with. And lots of legends who didnt even make it. Payton is no more a legend than Nique who didnt even make the first list.

There isnt one speck of evidence Payton would make it. Reggie Miller made Elliot Kalbs top 50, Slam made him #52, and TNT had him listed as one of the next 10. And I dont think hed make a top 50 redo either. About the only locks who didnt make it the first time are Duncan and Kobe. KG and AI probably arent even locks. Jason Kidd either.

Now me doing it personally...id put Payton over Drexler and a few others who made it. But he could be in the 60s very easily.


[QUOTE]You're right. He doesn't have the MVPs and wasn't that big of a part on his championship, but his individual greatness was so high he should be in. He outplayed players like John Stockton when it counted, and Stockton was in the early 20s, so I don't see how he could be close to Stockton. And he was a PG, PGs did a lot more things than your average SG. He was also a 2-Way Player, and easily a Top 5 2 Way-Guard, TOP 5, and that counts scoring and defense, the 2 most important categories when comparing all players. He really had no hole in his game, and was very good individually. Add to that the team success he enjoyed, Top 6 in Assists, Record 9 Straight Defensive 1st, and many other little things, he has a good case to be around 28.[/QUOTE]

You list his resume as if everyone listed doesnt have a great one. Hell #78 is 50 spots behind Gary and has 3 titles, a finals MVP, 7 finals appearances(all as a major player. He averaged 16/8/5 in the worst of his teams finals runs), 9 all D teams, an all nba first team, and upon his retirement was called by Magic the greatest defensive guard of all time. All of these people had great careers. Paytons does not stand out that much. Hes a big fish in a tank full of big fish.

[QUOTE]Its called the ABA. The ABA peaked in the 70s KBlaze8855. The players still playing in the NBA didn't have nearly as much competetion as they did in the 80s, or even 60s. With less competition, players had better stats, defenses were weaker, and it was easier to win championships, get more awards, and I can just go on with the affect that another league can have on the NBA.[/QUOTE]

We went over the ABA a few times and the more I look into it the less I see thats impressive. For one...the majority of ABA greats didnt do anything nearly as impressive in the NBA. And the better stats and all? The 60s stats are the biggest ever and they were pre ABA for the most part. How many 37ppg seasons were in the 70s? None. The 80s had one. how many seasons in the 70s did 3 people score 30ppg? 1. happened 2-3 times in the 80s(if you count Birds 29.98). Happened a couple years ago. In fact we had 3 people over 31 a game. If 70s stats are inflated so much then why were people getting better numbers in the 60s? Seems to me they just gradually decreased form the early 60s. From about 1974 on peoples numbers look about the same.

Cowens was a 19/14/5 player after the ABA was gone. Kareem had 2 MVPs and 13 al lstar games after the ABA. Hayes made 2 of his 3 all nba first teams post ABA and 2 of his 3 finals including the one he won. **** Magic won his first title the year after Hayes led his team to the finals. How much different you think the leage got in the 3 months between Hayes being in the finals and the Magic/Bird era? Nobody great before the merger failed to be after it unless they were just getting old(Havlicek for example who was 36 at the time).

[QUOTE]ABA was the reason the 70s weren't that great, and if you call 70s equal to any other era, you are really overrating the 70s.[/QUOTE]

Explain this to me....if Cowens isnt that good since he played in the 70s...why is Wills Reed better than Payton?


[QUOTE]Also, basketball is getting more popular and competition therefore is generally increasing with time, thats something modern players will always have over past players...[/QUOTE]

So players are worse as you go back in time but the 60s>the 70s? And not all of the 70s players. Just the ones you decide were not that good? Like cowens. Even though Reed is an exception I assume.




[QUOTE]Don't overrate and just look at awards/championships/stats in the 70s, I already explained why everything was inflated for them. Including stats, titles, and awards.[/QUOTE]

So you give Kareem high ranking based on what? The 80s? If you can dismiss what cowens did right next to Kareem and Reed...why do they get credit? His MVP right between Kareems 72 and 74 wins is less valid than Kareems? Reeds 71 and 73 titles factor in but not Cowens a year later and in 76? His 28/14 in the closeout game against Kareems Bucks was inflated somehow?

Why exactly do you choose to leave Cowens out and include other 70s greats? Or Elvin Hayes who was in the finals the year before Magic and was stil la superstar right next to them? How does that work exactly? Just count the players you feel like counting and dismiss the rest?



[QUOTE]If Nash was the clear cut MVP winner, you wouldn't be seeing me argue against that, and he would be really THAT good (Magic good). But he wasn't. And also, votes aren't everything, they are 1 argument, analysis is still neccesary.[/QUOTE]

I remember being told that what people think about what they saw was too subjective.

[QUOTE]Most have called me Open-Minded, you are one of the few that hasn't.[/QUOTE]

For one...ive never seen anyone call you open minded because youre about the only person I see even bring such a thing up. Also...most seem to think I know what im talking about. That factor in to you? I somehow doubt it.

[QUOTE=MiseryCityTexas]im just glad spencer haywood, adrian dantly, and artis gilmore made this list. these dudes get over looked miserably all the time.[/QUOTE]

Agreed, don't forget Alex English.

[QUOTE=BULLS]- Greatest offensive player the game has ever seen
- 2nd greatest defensive player the game has ever seen(behind his own teammate)
- 6 championships in the most difficult era in league history, as the undisputed #1 option
- Absurd stats(37.1 ppg, 32.5/8/8, and many more)
- Awards - 5 MVP's(really should be 10), 6 Finals MVP's, 10 time all NBA 1st team, DPOY, 9-time all-defensive first team
- Won with the worst supporting cast out of any player in league history(many fools like to argue that Pippen and Rodman was a great supporting cast, but the fact is a defensive-oriented SF and an offensively challenged PF do not make a great supporting cast).

I think it's pretty clear who the GOAT is. Jordan easily.[/QUOTE]

Yes, but why is it important to you that I "understand" this?

Anyway, I'm glad the season is starting soon and thanks for the great thread. BULLS, your opinions may not have any merit, but you sure do make an ass out of yourself.