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

[B]TALK ABOUT THE PLAYERS WHO YOU BELIEVE SHOULD HAVE BEEN HIGHER ON THE LIST, ARE WAY TO HIGH ON THE LIST. ALSO TALK DISCUSS PLAYERS THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN IN THE TOP 100 AND PLAYERS THAT HAVE NO BUSINESS BEING ON THIS LIST.[/B]


[I]Insidehoops has finally gotten through with it’s 100 Greatest Players list in 100 days (well probably 108 days, I wasn‘t here a couple of days and they went on a while longer). There is a bunch of great players, some hall of famers who didn’t even make this list.[/I]


-Gilbert Arenas
-Rolando Blackman
-Walter Davis
-Cliff Hagan
-Lou Hudson
-Gus Johnson
-Marques Johnson
-Bobby Jones
-Bill Laimbeer
-Lafayette Lever
-Ed MaCauley
-Jermaine O’Neal
-Jim Pollard
-Micheal Ray Richardson
-Jack Sikma
-Rudy Tomjanovich
-Chet Walker
-Paul Westphal
Just to name a few…


[I]Thanks to everyone from insidehoops who participated in these threads over the past 100+ days. I’m pretty sure everyone learned something they didn’t know before after voting and reading up on players.[/I]


#100 - Mark Aguirre. Mark Aguirre played in an era where the small forward was one of the deepest positions. #5, #12, #43, #58, #60, #61, #71 and #83 were all SF’s he had to play nightly. He held his own with the Dallas Mavericks and latter as a Piston. He made all of him NBA All-Star appearances and his highest scoring average (29.5) with Dallas. He was traded for #71 and helped Dallas win back to back titles as he played with #20, #47 and #62.

| PPG 20 | RPG 5 | APG 3.1 |
[B]3 NBA All-Star Games
Field Goal attempts leader
2 NBA Championships[/B]


[IMG]http://www.nba.com/media/history/dal_uni_02.jpg[/IMG]


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

[B]#100 Greatest Player Voting[/B]
[U]Mark Aguirre = 8 votes[/U]
Gilbert Arenas = 3 votes
Lafayette Lever = 3 votes
Jim Pollard = 2 votes
Bobby Jones = 1 vote
Bill Laimbeer = 1 vote
Ed MaCauley = 1 vote
Rik Smits = 1 vote

[B]
Number 101 seems to be a tie between Gilbert Arenas and Fat Lever...[/B]


[URL="http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=57656"]Official #100 NBA Player Of All Time According To ISH[/URL]

I can't believe Jack Skima didn't make it. I'm so ashamed.

[B]TOO HIGH[/B]
-The first player I think that is slightly too high is David Robinson at #19. He’s listed above possibly 3 players from the same era that were better then him. 5 spots lower around 25 or 26 would have been good.

-#24 Kobe Bryant, I thought it was a conspiracy when Kobe got 39 votes to be the 24th Greatest player. #26, #27 and #28. Clyde Drexler, Scottie Pippen and Gary Payton. Someone called it “the attack of the 90’s semi-legends.” While Clyde is my favorites player of All-time, he is about 7-8 spots to high, same with Scottie and GP. All three are about 7-8 spots to high. None of those guys should be over Gervin, the other Clyde, Elvin Hayes, ect.

-Allen Iverson at #31 is also a couple of spots too high.

-Kevin Johnson at #46 is way, way, way too high on the list …way. I could name tons of players on this list thath should be above him. #47, #48 and #49, Dennis Rodman, Dirk Nowitzki and Steve Nash are about 5 spots high. They should be in the early 50’s.

-#52 and #53, Pete Maravich and T-Mac are slightly high on the list. #62 and #63, Joe Dumars and Bill Sharman are too high.
-#75, #77 and #79 … Vince Carter, Ray Allen and Paul Pierce are all at least 10-12 spots too high. Webber, Mullin, DJ, Grant Hill, ect are all better
-#95, Mel Daniels should have been a tad bit higher. Two MVP’s, Three Titles …



[B]TOO LOW[/B]
-George Gervin is the first player I thought too be too low at #34. AI,HP, Clyde, ect shouldn’t be above ‘Ice Man’

-Dave DeBuscherre is too low on the list at #67.

-#78 Dennis Johnson is lower then he should be. Ray Allen, Vince Carter, over DJ, ha.

-#82 and #83, former teammates Webber and Mullin are to low. Paul Pierce has a better career then these two guy, yeah right.

-#93 and 94, George McGinnis and Tim Hardaway are to low. KJ #46 and Timmy #94, LOL. Guys played in the same era and where not that far apart. Hell, some would say Timmy is better.



[B]WHY?[/B]
#97 Tom Chambers shouldn’t even be on this 100 Greatest List.

nice job, kizzle. this took a lot of work on your part. whether or not i agree with the picks doesn't matter. way to put in the time and effort! :cheers:

Yeah, a lot of effort was done on your part...we all appreciate it.
This should be a sticky, and be posted on Insidehoops as an article.

[B]TOO HIGH [/B]

#46. Kevin Johnson - Honestly, this high? No, KJ is good but not good enough for the top 50. Charles Barkley played with both KJ and Maurice Cheeks, and he said Cheeks was the best point guard he ever played with, and Cheeks is way down at #98!! Ridiculous that KJ is this high!

#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!

#53. Tracy McGrady - Not getting past the first round, he doesn't deserve to be this high... And yes, I am a T-Mac fan.

#92. Tommy Heinsohn - Not good enough to be in the top 100.

#99. Ben Wallace - I'm a Ben Wallace fan, don't get me wrong, but I think he just hasn't done it throughout his career or enough to warrant a top 100 spot. I could see other guys taking his place in the top 100. Wallace has been in the league since 1996, but only in 2002 did he really start playing well.

[B]TOO LOW [/B]

#49. Steve Nash - Two MVP's and a few trips to the Conference Finals warrant more than the #49 spot.

#71. Adrian Dantley - underrated once again!

#85. Mitch Richmond - One of the most underrated players in the history of the National Basketball Association. Richmond was a sensational scorer, and played exceptionally for numerous years throughout his career.


[B]WHO SHOULD HAVE MADE THE LIST [/B]

Glen Rice
Larry Johnson
Bill Laimbeer

[QUOTE]#71. Adrian Dantley - underrated once again![/QUOTE]

[B]THANK YOU[/B]

dirk nowitzki on 48. Can't complain about that : )

but i would have seen Nash some numbers higher.

I still struggle with the idea of Robert Parrish at #56, Dikembe Mutombo at #80 but Dan Issel at #86.

I'd have both Willis Reed and Dave Cowens in the late teens low twentys. In with Isiah. I think in clumps that the list is pretty good.

I'd also have Dennis Johnson way higher.


It was a monumental achievement on your behalf. Nice work.

Dirk is WAY too high.

[img]http://www.nba.com/media/history/dal_uni_02.jpg[/img]


Mark Aguirre is one of the most underrated player in the History of the NBA and one of the best scorer in the 1980's. I think he is also the 2nd best player to ever played in a Dallas Mavericks Franchise.

[quote]In 1986–87 and 1987–88 he made the All-Star Team and averaged 25.7 and 25.1 points, respectively, during the regular season. The Mavericks won more than 50 games each year. The 1987–88 edition of the franchise went 53-29, beat Houston and the Denver Nuggets in the first two rounds of the postseason, then extended the Lakers to seven games before losing in the Western Conference Finals.[/quote] [B]from Wikipedia[/B]

[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/a/aguirma01.html[/url]


[U][B]Career Stats[/B][/U]

20.0 PPG, 3.1 APG, 5.0 RPG

[U][B]Playoff stats[/B][/U]

17.1 PPG, 5.3 RPG, 2.6 APG

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.

All in all great effort kizz on a great concept. Wait to stick it through right to the end and at least bring a little participation to the NBA lounge during the off season:applause:

Ben Wallace should not even be near this list.

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

I somewhat agree. I would have had Bobby Jones over him and Kwajo's beloved Sikma. Ro Blackmon as well. But we are responsible for voting and this is how it went. Hence the outcome was detemined by fans who might not have known about the accomplishments of earlier players.

[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]
but you could build a contender around barkley. rodman was a piece of the puzzle but was never even the second best player on one of those 5 title teams (actually in hindsight people rank him this high but during his career he was never valued so highly by the public - which could be an indication that hind sight is 20-20 or that we get overawed by rings and rebound titles as time passes. on the pistons he was considered maybe the 6th best player at the time, on the spurs he ranked after robinson and elliot in most minds, and on the bulls after jordan and pippen).

i'm not even saying that if you switched charles and rodman you'd get better results with charles in detroit and chicago. i'm just saying that given their histories, chuck's relative value to his playoff teams was higher than dennis's relative value to his championship squads in the eyes of most people who would vote charles that high.

fun side topic

good non top 100 players

Larry Johnson before the back injury
Sean Elliot
John Starks
Reggie Lewis

Props to Kizzle for finishing the list all the way through. Has some rough spots, and some terrible spots (Maravich and McGrady where they are), but overall, it's not that bad for the most part.

[QUOTE=dejordan]but you could build a contender around barkley. rodman was a piece of the puzzle but was never even the second best player on one of those 5 title teams (actually in hindsight people rank him this high but during his career he was never valued so highly by the public - which could be an indication that hind sight is 20-20 or that we get overawed by rings and rebound titles as time passes. on the pistons he was considered maybe the 6th best player at the time, on the spurs he ranked after robinson and elliot in most minds, and on the bulls after jordan and pippen).

i'm not even saying that if you switched charles and rodman you'd get better results with charles in detroit and chicago. i'm just saying that given their histories, chuck's relative value to his playoff teams was higher than dennis's relative value to his championship squads in the eyes of most people who would vote charles that high.[/QUOTE]

That I can agree with. Im not saying Rodman should be above Barkley, but that the distance between the two shouldn't be so vast. They played the same position during the same era. Dennis had more success.

Yeah, he was further down the star on his teams but I feel that makes him all the more valued. Here is why: If your going to build a contender, you must take in account for chemistry. You didn't have to worry about Rodman complaining about not getting the ball. Nor did you worry about his work ehtic or shape. Yes his off-court antics raised eyebrows with the media, but he never let that effect his ability to play. You knew what you were getting when he signed the contract.

Barkley had a huge ego to go along with his large pear shaped body. He wasn't the greatest locker mate. Quite possibly why he never won a ring.

To me if I were a GM, I'd take Rodman over Barkley anyday. There are 4 other guys on the floor to score. Let him go in and crash the boards and dive after the loose balls.

I would bet my life on any group that isnt made up of mostly impressionable teenagers(who vote the same way once someone makes a big deal of one player) not putting Gary Payton as high as 28. 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...

Elvin Hayes led the L in scoring and rebounding(rebounding at least twice). Was a 29/17 player in his prime. Made more all star teams(even if you add one to Payton for 99) and more all NBA first teams. Hes the 6th all time leading scorer and the 4th all time leading rebounder. He made 3 finals and won a title that unlike Paytons was when he was still a superstar. He was also one of the guys whio lasted from Russells era to Bird and Magics. He was an all star with Russell and an all star with Bird and Magic. Hell he only missed Jordan by one season so nobody can even say he only played in the old days. He was the second leading scorer for the entire decade of the 70s after Kareem.

And Hayes might not even be the best player listed after Payton. And its just Payton though. Hes one of a number of unusual picks in that range. He, Drexler, Pippen, and Kobe are all too high. Seems for a moment everyone just threw out the usual career measuring standards. I mean...there are 3MVPS who also led teams to titles(2 of them multiple titles) under all 4 of them.

Scottie is my favorite or second favorite player ever, Drexler is underrated these days, Payton was nice, and Kobe is one of the best scorers ever...but cmon. If you can win MVP AND lead a team to a couple titles you deserve to be ranked over them if we are going even partly by accomplishment. And its not like these are guys who were not skilled too.

And lets be real here...would any NBA GM trade Payton, Drexler, or Pippen for Patrick Ewing in the 90s? Well maybe remove Payton since he peaked a bit later than the others. But it seems odd to me. I mean if skills are being so heavily relied on(which is what Iassume since accomplishments clearly were not otherwise Hayes and company are much higher)...

Payton and Webber probably peaked in the same general area. About 99-02. Webber is #82. Payton 28. Am I the only one who remembers that Webber was probably considered better at the time?

[QUOTE=lurch67]That I can agree with. Im not saying Rodman should be above Barkley, but that the distance between the two shouldn't be so vast. They played the same position during the same era. Dennis had more success.

Yeah, he was further down the star on his teams but I feel that makes him all the more valued. Here is why: If your going to build a contender, you must take in account for chemistry. You didn't have to worry about Rodman complaining about not getting the ball. Nor did you worry about his work ehtic or shape. Yes his off-court antics raised eyebrows with the media, but he never let that effect his ability to play. You knew what you were getting when he signed the contract.

Barkley had a huge ego to go along with his large pear shaped body. He wasn't the greatest locker mate. Quite possibly why he never won a ring.

To me if I were a GM, I'd take Rodman over Barkley anyday. There are 4 other guys on the floor to score. Let him go in and crash the boards and dive after the loose balls.[/QUOTE]
OR there might be four other guys on the floor who need help scoring, so you might need charles to create offense - something he did as well as just about any front court player this side of shaq and the other absolute best centers in the game. guys like hersey hawkins and dan majerle made a living off of what charles set up for them. rodman couldn't do that. there's a reason he had so much success with the greatest scorer of the last 40 years. but i do agree that having guys without egos who can contribute without needing to get shots is a great, great benefit to any team. the other knock against rodman is that he could lose focus and be a head case (sitting on the sideline with his shoes off during a conference finals game because he was mad at david robinson). charles might not be fan-friendly sometimes, but on the court he was business.

[QUOTE=BULLS][B]Too High:[/B]

6. Bill Russell - Not even a top 6 center of all-time, let alone player. He is around the 20-25 range.

11. Jerry West - 13 spots ahead of the 2nd greatest SG ever? :oldlol:

8. Oscar Robertson - Perhaps the worst ranking ever. Ahead of Hakeem? Duncan? Malone? No f'ing way. He is around top 35 all-time.

[B]Too Low:[/B]

24. Kobe Bryant - Kobe is unquestionably top 8 all-time. Scrubs like Oscar, West, Russell, Pettit, Havlicek(I could go on and on) ahead of him? :roll: He's easily the 2nd greatest SG ever. He's around the 6-9 range.[/QUOTE]

Who didn't see you coming?

Karl Malone is too high, as are Gary Payton and Clyde Drexler.

For the most part, the list is pretty reasonable. There are plenty of recent players(90's/00's) who never won anything, nor had great individual accolades, who are on the list over great players from a few years back.

As already stated by somebody, I'd have Bobby Jones ahead of Ben Wallace, as well a few other players who I don't think are even deserving of a spot at all(Penny, Chambers, Tim Hardaway).The top 15 is pretty good, although I might have made a minor adjustment or two.

The biggest beef I have with the list though is this....

[QUOTE=L.Kizzle]

62. Joe Dumars

66. Sidney Moncrief

78. Dennis Johnson


[/QUOTE]

In my opinion, Moncrief is a tier ahead of Dumars when ranking 80's-90's era guards. Personally, I'd also have DJ slightly ahead of Dumars too.

Most people seem to think that Dumars is the greatest of the three. I figure the reason for him over Moncrief is because of his Finals MVP, but then again, DJ has an MVP as well, but is generally considered the worst of the three. Its not just the casual fan that regards Dumars as the greatest player either, as Dumars is the only one of the three in the HOF. I'll never understand why fans and experts alike rank Dumars ahead of Sid and DJ.

[QUOTE=otmtheshank]

In my opinion, Moncrief is a tier ahead of Dumars when ranking 80's-90's era guards. Personally, I'd also have DJ slightly ahead of Dumars too.

Most people seem to think that Dumars is the greatest of the three. I figure the reason for him over Moncrief is because of his Finals MVP, but then again, DJ has an MVP as well, but is generally considered the worst of the three. Its not just the casual fan that regards Dumars as the greatest player either, as Dumars is the only one of the three in the HOF. I'll never understand why fans and experts alike rank Dumars ahead of Sid and DJ.[/QUOTE]
i'm with you on this. i actually have dj first cause i'm a celts fan, but the principle of the argument is the same. where's the separation that one should be hof and the others shouldn't?

Dr. J was way too high.

Too High:

McGrady
Maravich
AI (a bit)
Kobe(a bit)
Oscar Robertson (like 1 or 2 spots too high)

Too low:

Dennis Johnson
Tim Hardaway
Adrian Dantley (a bit)

first off...

[B][SIZE="7"]THANK YOU L.KIZZLE FOR MAKING THIS LIST YOU KICK ASS!!!!!![/SIZE][/B]

seriously...I know that wasn't easy at times counting every day

thank you


second...

iverson at #31 is a complete joke

[quote]iverson at #31 is a complete joke[/quote]
Here we go. :rolleyes:

[quote=-primetime-]iverson at #31 is a complete joke[/quote]
Man you never give up do you? :lol:

[QUOTE=Rockets(T-mac)]Too High:

McGrady[/QUOTE]

Thank you! That's 2 T-mac fans (me too) who feel McGrady was too high.

[QUOTE=Rockets(T-mac)]Man you never give up do you? :lol:[/QUOTE]
nope...

saying Allen Iverson is the 31st best player in the history of the NBA should piss off all NBA fans here...it is just plain wrong. He for the most part of his career was just a ball hogging 1,000 atempts per game shooter that has never won a title.

#100. mark aguirre > #31 allen iverson

that's what I think of that

[QUOTE=-primetime-]nope...

saying Allen Iverson is the 31st best player in the history of the NBA should piss off all NBA fans here...it is just plain wrong. He for the most part of his career was just a ball hogging 1,000 atempts per game shooter that has never won a title.

#100. mark aguirre > #31 allen iverson

that's what I think of that[/QUOTE]
:roll: I'm officially never going to take you seriously anymore.

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=Richie2k6]:roll: I'm officially never going to take you seriously anymore.[/QUOTE]
says the guy with the AI avatar...

[quote=-primetime-]nope...

saying Allen Iverson is the 31st best player in the history of the NBA should piss off all NBA fans here...it is just plain wrong. He for the most part of his career was just a ball hogging 1,000 atempts per game shooter that has never won a title.

#100. mark aguirre > #31 allen iverson

that's what I think of that[/quote] Wow now we know you are just a hat*r. He got on a bit too high yes but not by much. He is amazing get the hell over it.

[QUOTE=-primetime-]says the guy with the AI avatar...[/QUOTE]
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=Kblaze8855]I would bet my life on any group that isnt made up of mostly impressionable teenagers(who vote the same way once someone makes a big deal of one player) not putting Gary Payton as high as 28. 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...
[/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]
Elvin Hayes led the L in scoring and rebounding(rebounding at least twice). Was a 29/17 player in his prime. Made more all star teams(even if you add one to Payton for 99) and more all NBA first teams. Hes the 6th all time leading scorer and the 4th all time leading rebounder. He made 3 finals and won a title that unlike Paytons was when he was still a superstar. He was also one of the guys whio lasted from Russells era to Bird and Magics. He was an all star with Russell and an all star with Bird and Magic. Hell he only missed Jordan by one season so nobody can even say he only played in the old days. He was the second leading scorer for the entire decade of the 70s after Kareem.[/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=Rockets(T-mac)]Wow now we know you are just a hat*r. He got on a bit too high yes but not by much. He is amazing get the hell over it.[/QUOTE]
ok...

I love the guy i promise I do...he is fun as hell to watch

it's just that...i can see right through his game, and it isn't nearly as great as everyone makes it out to be. he is amazing for his size and he has had some increadable games, but the dude has the ball 24/7 and shoots it 500 times. Obviously that is going to result in some scoring titles. Now I don't REALLY think that Aggire should be ranked above him but I am not so sure that Iverson should be considered in the top 50. And If the NBA decided to make another top 50 list then I am sure they would have trouble trying to sneak him in there.