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

[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