ESPN posts its top 100 for this coming season. You will experience mild disgust

[DoctorP]

Looking forward to the tmz top 50 next

[FireDavidKahn]

Herro over D'Angelo Russell????

[highwhey]

Well, he's not wrong. Rudy Gobert game in game out is much more impactful than Mitchell or Booker. You can say whatever you want about the playoffs, but you actually have to get there first. You are more likely to do that with Gobert as opposed to the other two.

i know about gobert's impact, and yes, he is incorrectly ranked, i'm taking a dig at rudy's #1 fan

[AlternativeAcc.]

You literally cant win with westbrick so 36 seems a bit high, but props to them for not putting him top 30. Espn gained some credibility for that.

[bobopenguin]

wow, porzingis 41.

[Kblaze8855]

only a few guys on the list you can argue over him. Putting up big numbers on bad teams or playing 2nd fiddle shouldn't be over a guy that has carried his team at both ends for 6 years

Im not sure anyone in history has been credit with carrying an offense because he sets so many screens. Sure...its a great thing to have.....but its hard to call it a carry. He gets like 8 shots a game and shoots 70% Deandre Jordan style because he doesnt have the skill to be played through. He has more turnovers than assists so its not like he makes up a lack of scoring ability by making plays for others....again...outside picks. I remember reading he set a few hundred more picks one year than anyone else in the NBA. No doubt useful.....but calling it a carry is tough. Hes obviously never gonna do anything like Mitchell dropping 51 in a 2 point playoff win. Same game Gobert had 17 and shot 88%....like he often does....but its hard to say hes the "carry" side of that relationship on offense. In a normal game its not such a drastic difference obviously but....the idea is the same.

Nobody would credit the Davis boys for carrying Reggie Miller when they set him 45 screens for 30 points. In todays more screen based game its something to consider and value....it just isnt the same thing as being able to score yourself or create a shot. Hes not leading the NBA in dunks every year because of his ability to create them. Someone else has to do it for the most part. Theres something to be said for positioning, finding the openings to roll, getting putbacks and all that. But its not....a carry.

You could say he carries them on defense and is a key cog in the offense. That would be fair. The offense works better with him. But he doesnt have it in him to put the ball in the basket at a rate to call it a carry. A solid pick is great. I appreciate them. But the ball has to go in the basket too. And he simply cant be trusted to put it there often enough to say he carries that side of the ball more than someone who can literally score about half your points in a tight playoff game many of them on plays that dont require much outside assistance.

[Xiao Yao You]

Im not sure anyone in history has been credit with carrying an offense because he sets so many screens. Sure...its a great thing to have.....but its hard to call it a carry. He gets like 8 shots a game and shoots 70% Deandre Jordan style because he doesnt have the skill to be played through. He has more turnovers than assists so its not like he makes up a lack of scoring ability by making plays for others....again...outside picks. I remember reading he set a few hundred more picks one year than anyone else in the NBA. No doubt useful.....but calling it a carry is tough. Hes obviously never gonna do anything like Mitchell dropping 51 in a 2 point playoff win. Same game Gobert had 17 and shot 88%....like he often does....but its hard to say hes the "carry" side of that relationship on offense. In a normal game its not such a drastic difference obviously but....the idea is the same.

Nobody would credit the Davis boys for carrying Reggie Miller when they set him 45 screens for 30 points. In todays more screen based game its something to consider and value....it just isnt the same thing as being able to score yourself or create a shot. Hes not leading the NBA in dunks every year because of his ability to create them. Someone else has to do it for the most part. Theres something to be said for positioning, finding the openings to roll, getting putbacks and all that. But its not....a carry.

You could say he carries them on defense and is a key cog in the offense. That would be fair. The offense works better with him. But he doesnt have it in him to put the ball in the basket at a rate to call it a carry. A solid pick is great. I appreciate them. But the ball has to go in the basket too. And he simply cant be trusted to put it there often enough to say he carries that side of the ball more than someone who can literally score about half your points in a tight playoff game many of them on plays that dont require much outside assistance.

The half court offense revolves around him. Without his screens, vertical spacing and offensive rebounding the rest of it doesn't work and you can certainly argue as to how well it works now with Mitchell's high usage/low efficiency. They have been a horrible team without him. They were tanking when he emerged and the 3 times he missed a month they were horrible. None of that was with Mitchell but nothing about Mitchell's game suggests they'd be good without Rudy

[Kblaze8855]

A team that doesnt accomplish anything accomplishing less without you isnt really worth talking about. The Rockets went like 2-23 without Steve Francis one year when they were otherwise solid. I dont know that being horrible without him means much in an evaluation of him. Just a bad team that needs all its pieces to be respectable....but being halfway respectable is nothing to hang your hat on. None of which considers that even if they are bad without him its as much or more because they miss his defense which is obviously outstanding.

As an offensive player hes just not gonna be credited with any kinda carry when hes taking 7 shots and someone created 6 of them for him....while he also has 2 assists and 3 turnovers. As I said.....when Dale Davis sets Reggie 26 good screens a game does that mean hes the centerpiece of the offense?





Reggie got like 7 screen assists that that game on 9 made shots. About 4 of them from Dale Davis who also got him looks on missed shots and for some of those FTs(the full game is availiable but im sure you dont care that much)..

While its fair to acknowledge his contribution to say he carried the Pacers with his 6 points would be a stretch.....which is why nobody ever said it.

You can find Pacer games Dale Davis sets like 30 points worth of picks. Doesnt make him more important than the guy who has to make the shots.

A team plays together....they are all responsible to some degree for the points they score. But the guy standing there while a guard uses him like a cone isnt gonna get the same credit as the one making the resulting pullup.

An awful lot of people without much talent wish it werent the case but really....Rick Mahorn will never get the credit no matter how solid his picks might have been.

The sole exception in history is probably Wes Unseld and unlike Gobert...his teams accomplished things.

If Rudy makes like 4 finals and wins a ring and finals MVP setting screens we might have a different discussion. Losing first round series doesnt tend to help your case for having monumental both ends impact on games. Not like its a KG or Tmac situation where its a one man army without help. When it comes down to it...he often is the help. Hes is not capable of the kinda performances Mitchell put on recently. And thats fine. Its not his job. But theres a reason its not his job to carry games that way. Hes not good enough on that end to do it.

He plays his role and does it well. But it is what it is. Hes not the guy youre looking to for 57 points in a playoff game or 50 in another one....and like 48 in another. He cant do that for you. He can contribute...but he cant carry. Doesnt mean he cant be important. His job on the other end can be just as important.

[Rosewood]

The top 10 is up. Do you have a
It? Great job

[Kblaze8855]

1. LeBron James (LAL)
2. Anthony Davis (LAL)
3. Giannis Antetokounmpo (MIL)
4. Luka Doncic (DAL)
5. Kawhi Leonard (LAC)
6. Kevin Durant (BKN)
7. Damian Lillard (POR)
8. Steph Curry (GSW)
9. James Harden (HOU)
10. Nikola Jokic (DEN)

[Rosewood]

Thank you

[Kblaze8855]

I’m guessing Harden and Steph fans feeling disrespected.

[bluechox2]

looks like some people in lakers org gave major head

[Stephonit]

I’m guessing Harden and Steph fans feeling disrespected.

It's ESPN. Pretty much the same people who vote for the FMVP. It's expected they make a mockery of themselves.

The Warriors at their peak were never suggested as having the two best players in basketball as this list claims the Lakers do although that is a far more credible assertion than the one made on this list. It should be mind blowing to anyone who takes their takes seriously but I guess this is confirmation even ESPN knows no one does.


Going by this list the Lakers have the #1, 2, 76, 77, 79, and 96 best players in the league. They better win and win decisively. No excuses if they don't.

[FireDavidKahn]

looks like some people in lakers org gave major head

Why?>

LeBron lead a team whose 3rd best player was KCP to an absolutely dominating run through the play offs. No team was in the same league as the Lakers and I should remind you that KCP was the 3rd best player