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

1. Michael Jordan-6 rings/5 mvps/10 NBA 1st teams
2. Wilt Chamberlain-2 rings/4 mvps/7 NBA 1st teams
3. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar-6 rings/6 mvps/10 NBA 1st teams
4. Earvin 'Magic' Johnson-5 rings/3 mvps/9 NBA 1st teams
5. Larry Bird-3 rings/3 mvps/9 NBA 1st teams
6. Bill Russell-11 rings/5 mvps/3 NBA 1st teams
7. Shaquille O'Neal-4 rings/1 mvp/8 NBA 1st teams
8. Oscar Robertson-1 ring/1 mvp/9 NBA 1st teams
9. Hakeem Olajuwon-2 rings/1 mvp/6 NBA 1st teams
10. Tim Duncan-4 rings/2 mvps/9 NBA 1st teams
11. Jerry West-1 ring/0 mvps/9 NBA 1st teams
12. Julius Erving-1 ring/1 mvp/5 NBA 1st teams
13. Moses Malone-1 ring/3 mvps/4 NBA 1st teams
14. Elgin Baylor-0 rings/0 mvps/10 NBA 1st teams
15. Bob Pettit-1 ring/2 mvps/10 NBA 1st teams
16. John Havlicek-8 rings/0 mvps/4 NBA 1st teams
17. Karl Malone-0 rings/2 mvps/11 NBA 1st teams
18. George Mikan-4 rings/0 mvps/5 NBA 1st teams
19. David Robinson-2 rings/1 mvp/4 NBA 1st teams
20. Isiah Thomas-2 rings/0 mvps/3 NBA 1st teams
21. Charles Barkley-0 rings/1 mvp/5 NBA 1st teams
22. John Stockton-0 rings/0 mvps/2 NBA 1st teams
23. Bob Cousy-6 rings/1 mvp/10 NBA 1st teams
24. Kobe Bryant-3 rings/0 mvps/5 NBA 1st teams
25. Rick Barry-1 ring/0 mvps/5 NBA 1st teams
26. Scottie Pippen-6 rings/0 mvps/3 NBA 1st teams
27. Clyde Drexler-1 ring/0 mvps/1 NBA 1st team
28. Gary Payton-1 ring/0 mvps/2 NBA 1st teams
29. Willis Reed-2 rings/1 mvp/1 NBA 1st team
30. Patrick Ewing-0 rings/0 mvps/1 NBA 1st team
31. Allen Iverson-0 rings/1 mvp/3 NBA 1st teams
32. Walt Frazier-2 rings/0 mvps/4 NBA 1st teams
33. Elvin Hayes-1 ring/0 mvps/3 NBA 1st teams
34. George Gervin-0 rings/0 mvps/5 NBA 1st teams
35. Jason Kidd-0 rings/0 mvps/5 NBA 1st teams
36. Dave Cowens-2 rings/1 mvp/0 NBA 1st teams
37. Kevin Garnett-0 rings/1 mvp/3 NBA 1st teams
38. Bob McAdoo-2 rings/1 mvp/1 NBA 1st team
39. Nate Thurmond-0 rings/0 mvps/0 NBA 1st teams
40. Wes Unseld-1 ring/1 mvp/1 NBA 1st team
41. Kevin McHale-3 rings/0 mvps/1 NBA 1st team
42. Dolph Schayes-1 ring/0 mvps/6 NBA 1st teams
43. Dominique Wilkins-0 rings/0 mvps/1 NBA 1st team
44. Bill Walton-2 rings/1 mvp/1 NBA 1st team
45. Sam Jones-10 rings/0 mvps/0 NBA 1st teams
46. Kevin Johnson-0 rings/0 mvps/0 NBA 1st teams
47. Dennis Rodman-5 rings/0 mvps/0 NBA 1st teams
48. Dirk Nowitzki-0 rings/1 mvp/3 NBA 1st teams
49. Steve Nash-0 rings/2 mvps/3 NBA 1st teams
50. Billy Cunningham-1 ring/0 mvps/3 NBA 1st teams
-----
51. Nate 'Tiny' Archibald-1 ring/0 mvps/3 NBA 1st teams
52. 'Pistol' Pete Maravich-0 rings/0 mvps/2 NBA 1st teams
53. Tracy McGrady-0 rings/0 mvps/2 NBA 1st teams
54. Hal Greer-1 ring/0 mvps/0 NBA 1st teams
55. Jerry Lucas-1 ring/0 mvps/3 NBA 1st teams
56. Robert Parish-4 rings/0 mvps/0 NBA 1st teams
57. Earl 'the Pearl' Monroe-1 ring/0 mvps/1 NBA 1st team
58. Bernard King-0 rings/0 mvps/2 NBA 1st teams
59. Artis Gilmore-0 rings/0 mvps/0 NBA 1st teams
60. Alex English-0 rings/0 mvps/0 NBA 1st teams
-----
61. James Worthy-3 rings/0 mvps/0 NBA 1st teams
62. Joe Dumars-2 rings/0 mvps/0 NBA 1st teams
63. Bill Sharman-4 rings/0 mvps/4 NBA 1st teams
64. Reggie Miller-0 rings/0 mvps/3 NBA 1st teams
65. Paul Arizin-1 ring/0 mvps/3 NBA 1st teams
66. Sidney Moncrief-0 rings/0 mvps/4 NBA 1st teams
67. Dave DeBusschere-2 rings/0 mvps/0 NBA 1st teams
68. Dave Bing-0 rings/0 mvps/2 NBA 1st teams
69. David Thompson-0 rings/0 mvps/2 NBA 1st teams
70. Lenny Wilkens-0 rings/0 mvps/0 NBA 1st teams
71. Adrian Dantley-0 rings/0mvps/0 NBA 1st teams
72. Bob Lanier-0 rings/0 mvps/0 NBA 1st teams
73. Neil Johntson-1 ring/0 mvps/4 NBA 1st teams
74. Walt Bellamy-0 rings/0 mvps/0 NBA 1st teams
75. Vince Carter-0 rings/0 mvps/0 NBA 1st teams
76. Spencer Haywood-1 ring/0 mvps/2 NBA 1st teams
77. Ray Allen-0 rings/0 mvps/0 NBA 1st teams
78. Dennis Johnson-3 rings/0 mvps/2 NBA 1st teams
79. Paul Pierce-0 rings/0 mvps/0 NBA 1st teams
80. Dikembe Mutombo-0 rings/0 mvps/0 NBA 1st teams
81. Connie Hawkins-0 rings/0 mvps/1 NBA 1st team
82. Chris Webber-0 rings/0 mvps/1 NBA 1st team
83. Chris Mullin-0 rings/0 mvps/1 NBA 1st team
84. Grant Hill-0 rings/0 mvps/1 NBA 1st team
85. Mitch Richmond-1 ring/0 mvps/0 NBA 1st teams
86. Dan Issel-0 rings/0 mvps/0 NBA 1st teams
87. 'Jumpin' Joe Fulks-1 ring/0 mvps/3 BAA 1st teams
88. Alonzo Mourning-1 ring/0 mvps/1 NBA 1st team
89. Shawn Kemp-0 rings/0 mvps/0 NBA 1st teams
90. Mark Price-0 rings/0 mvps/0 NBA 1st teams
91. Anfernee 'Penny' Hardaway-0 rings/0 mvps/2 NBA 1st teams
92. Tommy Heinsohn-10 rings/0 mvps/0 NBA 1st teams
93. George McGinnis-0 rings/0 mvps/1 NBA 1st team
94. Tim Hardaway-0 rings/0 mvps/1 NBA 1st team
95. Mel Daniels-0 rings/0 mvps/0 NBA 1st teams
96. Bob Davies-1 ring/0 mvps/0 NBA 1st teams
97. Tom Chambers-0 rings/0 mvps/0 NBA 1st teams
98. Maurice Cheeks-1 ring/0 mvps/0 NBA 1st teams
99. Ben Wallace-1 ring/0 mvps/0 NBA 1st teams
100. Mark Aguirre-2 rings/0 mvps/0 NBA 1st teams

TOO HIGH

[B][SIZE="3"]IMO[/SIZE][/B]


#10 - duncan
#45 - rodman (why is he even there?)
#28 - payton
#53 - mcgrady
#46 - johnson

my worry was that Iverson was going to go 15-20. i dont necessarily see #31 as an outrage at all. Just going by stats alone he's the 3rd greatest scorer the game has ever seen. i thought that fact was going to make young people vote him in at a ridiculous number.

but its not secret that guys like AI and Dr. J will always get some kind of free pass when it comes to rankings because of their influence in the game and outside of the game.

Still the influence, the MVPs, the clutch playoff performances (Iverson has 2 of the greatest game 7 performances in NBA history), and the scoring and steals averages are the reasons why Iverson is fair at #31.

when you see guys like Jordan and Bird praising Iverson, i think thats a pretty good sign that he's better than you think.... but maybe they just can't "see through" him like -primetime- can :D

[QUOTE=BULLS]Iverson is way too low. When you see guys like West, Havlicek, Pettit, Mikan, Cousy, and Barry ahead of Iverson, you know the list is garbage.

Iverson is around the 17-20 range.[/QUOTE]

lets not get crazy. but i think this is your job around here :lol:

[QUOTE=Kblaze8855]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]

Give me one legitimate reason Payton would not get voted in by the "NBA Voters". I mean, do they have something against him?

I was saying that the "General Consensus" or most, if not all, the Top 50 lists made have Gary Payton in there. So give me 1 reason why the "NBA Voters" for some reason wouldn't give the nod to Payton. Most have been putting Gary Payton in the Top 50, so I don't see why NBA voters won't. Give me 1 legitimate reason.


All I am saying is the general consensus is Payton = Top 50 easily, and that means MOST LIKELY Payton would be in Top 50 for NBA voters as well, not [I]"I Doubt he gets voted in at Top 50"[/I]

[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]

Don't tell me you think DJ > GP? And Payton didn't play at Magic's time, or Magic would've said GP is the best defensive PG.


[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]

KBlaze, use your head.

What happens in a league when there is less competition than there should be? Think about it for a second. EVERYTHING will be easier to do, from scoring, to stats, to awards, to All-Star App.

For example, pretend Eastern Confrence was their own league (ABA), and all their was the West (NBA). And all the Western teams got their players redistributed to 30 teams. Well it will be easier to put up good numbers first of all, since you are the center of the team. 2nd of all, getting All-Star App. and All-NBA Teams wouldn't be as hard with less competition, and the same goes with the MVP award.

Less Competition is = things are easier.

[QUOTE]

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

Willis Reed won his 2 titles in the early 70s. That is arguably the most competitive Era of basketball. Give him props, he started in the late 60s and was great in the early 70s and won 2 titles, MVP, and everything then. Thats why.




[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]

Well really, the big jump in basketball popularity came in different places. How many great players from the 60s are recognized vs. the ones in the 70s? The 60s might have had better best players, but I think more 70s players are remembered, just more popularity.

And really, 80s was the big jump. All I am saying is Basketball is more popular and competitive than it was 40 years ago. And also, many from the 60s also had to do their own things, the players in the 70s really weren't that much better, but should've gone further with what the legends from the 60s did. You know, "Based his game on..."



[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]

One again, Reed, Kareem, both were big in the Early 70s, a very compeitive Era in basketball. Cowens emerged after all the great 70s Teams fell, and ABA got at his peak. Think about it...

[QUOTE=haji_d_robertas]
14. Elgin Baylor-0 rings/0 mvps/10 NBA 1st teams
[/QUOTE]
why is this guy #14????

0 rings

0 mvps

[QUOTE=-primetime-]why is this guy #14????

0 rings

0 mvps[/QUOTE]
One of the greatest ever, no titles but went to the Finals 8 times, losing 3 games 7's. No MVP's but I think six top 5 finishes and I'm pretty sure a couple were at number 2.


You also gotta look at the era he played in, Wilt/Kareem/Russell/Robertson those are 4 top 10 players (from the list) alone in his era, a reason why he never won MVP and titles.

[QUOTE]Give me one legitimate reason Payton would not get voted in by the "NBA Voters". I mean, do they have something against him?[/QUOTE]

I think you are looking at it the wrong way. Im not saying there need to be a reason for him to not make it. hes just one of a long list of people(longer than 50) who could deserve it. Most of the guys already in are those borderline iconic types and of those who arent...there are enough new guys to replace them that Payton could getl eft out like Nique did.

[QUOTE]I was saying that the "General Consensus" or most, if not all, the Top 50 lists made have Gary Payton in there. So give me 1 reason why the "NBA Voters" for some reason wouldn't give the nod to Payton. Most have been putting Gary Payton in the Top 50, so I don't see why NBA voters won't. Give me 1 legitimate reason.[/QUOTE]

Already have. The mere fact that there are more than 50 players on the general level of those in the top 50 is reason enough he could fail to make it.


[QUOTE]All I am saying is the general consensus is Payton = Top 50 easily, and that means MOST LIKELY Payton would be in Top 50 for NBA voters as well, not "I Doubt he gets voted in at Top 50"[/QUOTE]

Payton like Nique is one of those fringe guys. Nobdoy who made it the first time has gotten any worse since and hes not surpassed enough to make up for it. For him to make it a lot of legends would have to disregard a number of their contemporaries and the whole reason the old school guys got to vote is so every era would be represented.

Let me put it this way. I kinda see it like a challenged play in the NFL.

Payton has not had a career that would overturn the first decision. Not indisputable evidence. Duncan and Kobe have. AI might have(the MVP and 4 scoring titles help a lot). Payton is not one of those players. If its a challenged play...too many of the first 50 stand for Payton to get in I believe.

Duncan wins his challenge. Kobe wins his.

Nobody else is all that likely. Not when you look at who is already in.


[QUOTE]Don't tell me you think DJ > GP? And Payton didn't play at Magic's time, or Magic would've said GP is the best defensive PG.[/QUOTE]

I dont think DJ>Payton but I think their careers arent nearly as different as their listing here. 28 to 82 is a massive change.

And there is no way of knowing that. Magic says a lot of things. Hes not the most consistient guy.


[QUOTE]KBlaze, use your head.

What happens in a league when there is less competition than there should be? Think about it for a second. EVERYTHING will be easier to do, from scoring, to stats, to awards, to All-Star App.[/QUOTE]

Yet even with these easier to get stats...stats were worse than the 60s and around the same area as the 80s. And the only guys in the ABA on an NBA MVP level were Doc and a young Moses Malone who was a few years from that status. And as I said...if the ABA made guys great why did they continue to be great after the ABA? Cowens was about as productive as ever and Hayes did most of his winning post ABA.

[QUOTE]For example, pretend Eastern Confrence was their own league (ABA), and all their was the West (NBA). And all the Western teams got their players redistributed to 30 teams. Well it will be easier to put up good numbers first of all, since you are the center of the team. 2nd of all, getting All-Star App. and All-NBA Teams wouldn't be as hard with less competition, and the same goes with the MVP award.

Less Competition is = things are easier.[/QUOTE]

If the ABA had an equal split with the NBA talent wise that would be a good comparison. But they didnt. There is a reason Doctor J went from being a 30/11/5 guy to a 21 a game playeri n the NBA. And charlie Scott went from a 33 a game player to the 20s. Why Brisker went from 29 a game i nthe ABA to 13 in the NBA one season later. Why Spencer Haywood was putting up wilt numbers(30/20) i nthe ABA and not the NBA. Barnes goes from 24 a game to 10. Gilmore putting up like 24 and 18. Billy Cunningham went to the ABA and won MVP with his NBA career starting to decline(he was 30 back when players retired around that time..he retired at 32).

The ABA was an inferior league with a fraction of the NBAs fans lesser players due to less money to give them and by the time the NBA took them in the ABA had been reduced to very few teams. Only 4 joined the NBA and the other 2 just got broken up. I think the only other two that existed then had folded before the merger. The ABA died and was never the equal of the NBA in talent or anything else.


[QUOTE]Willis Reed won his 2 titles in the early 70s. That is arguably the most competitive Era of basketball. Give him props, he started in the late 60s and was great in the early 70s and won 2 titles, MVP, and everything then. Thats why.[/QUOTE]

Maybe you didnt notice but in Reeds second title winning season...in those early 70s youre praising...that was cowens MVP season. And Cowens first title was won in 1974...one season after Reed. A 73 title is praise worthy but a 73 MVP isnt...and a 73 title is great but a 74 one is inferior? That makes sense to you? Reeds gets credit and love for the 73 title when Cowens was MVP and leading a 68 win team the same year and won a title the next one. You really telling me that?



[QUOTE]Well really, the big jump in basketball popularity came in different places. How many great players from the 60s are recognized vs. the ones in the 70s? The 60s might have had better best players, but I think more 70s players are remembered, just more popularity.[/QUOTE]

Lot of overlap. The only 2 big 70s stars who were not 60s stars too are Kareem and Doctor J. Gervin is remembered but he was in his peak from like 87 to 84. Earl Monroe was 60s and 70s. Oscar was mostly 60s but some 70s. Wilt was a bit of both. West too. Id say 55-65 isnt all that popular but 65-75 is about normal.

[QUOTE]And really, 80s was the big jump. All I am saying is Basketball is more popular and competitive than it was 40 years ago. And also, many from the 60s also had to do their own things, the players in the 70s really weren't that much better, but should've gone further with what the legends from the 60s did. You know, "Based his game on..."[/QUOTE]

Has anyone ever gone further than what the legends from the 60s did? The only way to consider anyone the equal of the 60s greats is to dismiss the eras accomplishments. Russell and Wilt basically destroy everyone if you dont. 70s didnt have a Russell or Wilt...but they had Kareem. 60s had a couple possible GOATS(maybe 3 depending on how you feel about oscar). 70s had 1. 80s had 2. 90s had 1. We have none now but he had one a few years ago.

The 70s are the least acclaimed era....but I dont think its due to inferior players. 70s seemed like a "team" era to me more than a player era. Reeds knicks, Cowens Celtics, Barrys Warriors, Waltons Blazers, DJs Sonics, and so on. Bunch of "scrappy" ensemble teams without one GOAT level guy.


[QUOTE]One again, Reed, Kareem, both were big in the Early 70s, a very compeitive Era in basketball. Cowens emerged after all the great 70s Teams fell, and ABA got at his peak. Think about it...[/QUOTE]

Seems you only think 1973 is the early 70s when its Reed in question and not Dave.

How the hell is Dirk higher than Steve Nash?
And Ed Macauley should have made this list, take Big Ben out.

[QUOTE=lurch67]My beef is Barkley at 21 while Rodman is at 47. Yeah, Barkley put up more points, but Rodman was a part of 2 dynasties and had more boards. Basketball is more than just offense.[/QUOTE]
If Rodman in his prime was on Barkley's Suns, I'm sure they wouldn't have won 62 games in 92-93.

Kobe top ten no doubt.

[QUOTE=LBJ 4 MVP]How the hell is Dirk higher than Steve Nash?
And Ed Macauley should have made this list, take Big Ben out.[/QUOTE]
Dirk is more dominate than Nash

this list should be a sticky or something...

Thank God. I stopped voting after a while because I tired of being told my opinion held no value.

Someone sticky this.

Edit - I voted for Chris Mullin somewhere in the 70s I think. It's weird that I was dismissed for that, yet he ends up coming it at #83.

The most out-of-place player to me is Dennis Rodman. He should have been much lower in my opinion.

[QUOTE=ForceofNature]#47. Dennis Rodman - Probably the worst selection of the entire list. Yes, he owns rebounding titles, but he is just not as good as some people who didn't even make this list![/QUOTE]
Who not on the list was greater?
[QUOTE]Glen Rice
Larry Johnson
Bill Laimbeer[/QUOTE]
Rodman was certainly better than these 3 you mentioned as having should have made this list. Laimbeer had a good case to make this list, and he was probably more important to the 2 Pistons championships than Rodman. Rice and Johnson weren't great enough, though.
[QUOTE=kidachi]#45 - rodman (why is he even there?)[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Selenium]The most out-of-place player to me is Dennis Rodman. He should have been much lower in my opinion.[/QUOTE]

Defense is just as important to basketball as offense. Dennis Rodman was one of the greatest defensive players in NBA history; he was arguably the greatest forward ever defensively.

Basketball is a game of possessions; you can't score unless you have the ball. Rebounds create posessions. Rodman was one of the greatest rebounders ever--top 3 at least.

Rodman wasn't useless on offense, either; he was an especially good passer. And, his man couldn't leave him due to Rodman's offensive rebounding ability.

Look at some of the all-time great players offensively, but who weren't good defensively, who made this list, like Elgin Baylor (#14), Charles Barkley (#21), George Gervin (#34), Steve Nash (#49), Pete Maravich (#52), etc. What's wrong, then, with having an all-time great defensive player, who wasn't so good offensively, on this list, as well. Rodman, after all, isn't even the only such player on this list. Bill Russell (#6), Wes Unseld (#40), Dave DeBusschere (#67), Dikembe Mutombo (#80), etc. weren't big scorers, either. All-time greats aren't just scorers and so-called first options; they're also team players, great defenders, passers and rebounders.

Elliott Kalb in his ranking of the 50 Greatest Players, had Rodman at #30. Slam Magazine had him ranked #69. TNT in their Next 10 special nearly included him, and I recall Kenny Smith seemed to indicate that Rodman should've been included.

wow did someone just compare Larry Johnson to Rodman??

im not even sure Larry Johnson would make the ISH top 200 list

omfg... no Jack Sikma???!!!

[QUOTE=Korki Buchek]Also, George Mikan and Bob Cousy are way too high, while Dr. J. is a little too high. These 3 should all be in top 15, maybe top 10 on a "the 100 players that meant most to the game of basketball" list, but Cousy as the 23rd GREATEST player of all time? Sorry, that's just flat out inaccurate.[/QUOTE]
Why weren't these guys great, because they played in a different era?

[QUOTE=-primetime-]yeah you said I keep overlapping your facts with my opinions...

well?...like I said, what else can I do?[/QUOTE]
Understand the facts and accept them?

That's like saying "This car is faster, and I have the stats to prove it." Yet you continue to say "I think the other car is faster", when all the facts show completely otherwise.
[quote]How the hell is Dirk higher than Steve Nash?
And Ed Macauley should have made this list, take Big Ben out.[/quote]
There's no reason Nash > Dirk, at all. Dirk is better.

Is this a good idea or not?


Some of the smart voters in this need to get together and vote again. Posters like Kizzle, D-Fence, and others who have a good sense of history, and they should go around and do this

It will give us a good look

[QUOTE=IceMan2]Is this a good idea or not?


Some of the smart voters in this need to get together and vote again. Posters like Kizzle, D-Fence, and others who have a good sense of history, and they should go around and do this

It will give us a good look[/QUOTE]

And how do we decide who's "smart"

[QUOTE=IceMan2]Is this a good idea or not?


Some of the smart voters in this need to get together and vote again. Posters like Kizzle, D-Fence, and others who have a good sense of history, and they should go around and do this

It will give us a good look[/QUOTE]

I don't know, it's agreed that nobody's exactly happy with it. That sounds like democracy to me.

[QUOTE=ALlArOuNDPIaya]And how do we decide who's "smart"[/QUOTE]

People who have contributed positively the most or L.Kizzle can decide since this was his idea....he can choose who should do it again...its actually all up to him

Ben Wallace, Paul Pierce, Ray Allen should not be on the list IMO...maybe the only one i can see a case for is Allen.

[QUOTE=lurch67]My beef is Barkley at 21 while Rodman is at 47. Yeah, Barkley put up more points, but Rodman was a part of 2 dynasties and had more boards. Basketball is more than just offense.[/QUOTE]




THANK YOU!!!!!:bowdown:

[QUOTE=Dbrog]Ben Wallace, Paul Pierce, Ray Allen should not be on the list IMO...maybe the only one i can see a case for is Allen.[/QUOTE]




just because he's like 2nd on the alltime 3's list... i do agree... is he second now?

[QUOTE=catzhernandez]just because he's like 2nd on the alltime 3's list... i do agree... is he second now?[/QUOTE]

Yuppers. 2nd place with 1,920 3's made. :)

also...
- Holds NBA record for most seasons leading the league in three-point field goals made with 3 (2001-02 with 229, 2002-03 with 201, 2005-06 with 269)
- Shares NBA record for most three-point field goals made in one half with 8 (April 14, 2002 vs. the Charlotte Hornets).

[QUOTE=Korki Buchek]This may be true, but I'm equally sure that if Barkley was on the 95-96 Bulls roster, they wouldn't have won 72 games.[/QUOTE]

True, probably 75.

[QUOTE=Dbrog][B]Ben Wallace,[/B] Paul Pierce, Ray Allen should not be on the list IMO...maybe the only one i can see a case for is Allen.[/QUOTE]

4 defensive player of the year awards dont count for anything?

Using the same 100 players voted in, I came up my own 100 greatest players list:

What do y'all think? I did this in about 15 minutes just of of memory. I'll probably go over it later.



[B][U]L.Kizzle

[QUOTE=L.Kizzle]Using the same 100 players voted in, I came up my own 100 greatest players list:

What do y'all think? I did this in about 15 minutes just of of memory. I'll probably go over it later.



[B][U]L.Kizzle

So now T-mac is 33 spots higher than VC?

right.....

[QUOTE=i seen hippos]So now T-mac is 33 spots higher than VC?

[B]right.....[/B][/QUOTE]
excellent dr. evil impression, hippos.

[QUOTE=L.Kizzle]8. Oscar Robertson[/QUOTE]
Didn't you originally begin voting for Robertson around #3? I think #8 is more reasonable--putting him below Russell and Kareem.

You still have Julius Erving ahead of Moses Malone. I'd like to hear a good argument for that one.

It seems you've rethought Dave DeBusschere, as well.

You lowered the rankings of the few 40s/50s players I managed to rally for, so I obviously don't approve of that.

Those are a few things that jump out to me.

[QUOTE=L.Kizzle]Using the same 100 players voted in, I came up my own 100 greatest players list:

What do y'all think? I did this in about 15 minutes just of of memory. I'll probably go over it later.



[B][U]L.Kizzle

[QUOTE=D-Fence]Didn't you originally begin voting for Robertson around #3? I think #8 is more reasonable--putting him below Russell and Kareem.

You still have Julius Erving ahead of Moses Malone. I'd like to hear a good argument for that one.

It seems you've rethought Dave DeBusschere, as well.

You lowered the rankings of the few 40s/50s players I managed to rally for, so I obviously don't approve of that.

Those are a few things that jump out to me.[/QUOTE]



[QUOTE=Glove_20]Even worse than ISH's list....[/QUOTE]
D-Fence and Glove_20, I did this in about 10-15 minutes, I didn't really go back and look over the list yet.