Originally Posted by IGOTGAME
about Kobe..is the criteria accomplishments or how good the player is...Because if it is how good the player was then I'll take Kobe....
I don't believe anyone set forth any strict criteria. It's open to debate, which is the way I prefer it. The one thing is that it's the 100 "Greatest" NBA players of all time. Not the "best," which is different. To develop your criteria, you first have to define "great." "Great" can mean "best" in part, but it can also be "most influential" or "most dominating" or "historically significant," "most accomplishments," etc. Then, there's how much importance or weight you give to each aspect. It's not simple, although, I suppose, it can be for you if you want.
do you honestly think Bob Petit is better bball player then Kobe..not accomplishments but a better player then Kobe
Although I havent seen much of Bob Petit...i know he put up some good stats but Im sure a player that good wouldnt stand out more in historical discussions
Pettit has ranked above Bryant in these kind of discussions before. Because not everyone is going to just ask "who's the best?" I don't--I consider multiple things, and that's where I came to voting for Pettit. Frankly, Bryant is below several other players, too, on my list.
I've tried to give my reasons and will continue to do so. Moreover, I probably don't consider the NBA of today as superior to the past NBA as others perhaps do, so that might be a partial explanation, too. I've also researched quite a bit about NBA history and am very interested in it, so I have a lot of appreciation for past players.
Anyhow, I'm not sure how to answer who's the best with certainty. Who's playing in whose era? Does Pettit get the benefit of the luxeries that make Bryant a better player (trainers, multiple coaches, strength conditioning, etc.)? Or, does Kobe have to lose much of his strength and play in a faster-paced game more dominated by big men? Because, that makes a huge difference.