What are some unpopular basketball beliefs that you have?

[pandiani17]

The 77' Ring is the greatest championship of all-time.

Shaquille O'Neal was not the most dominant player of all-time, rather he was the most toxic that cost his teams more titles than he won.

Paul Arizin, Dolph Schayes, and George Mikan all belong in respective top ten lists based on positions.

The Basketball Hall of Fame needs to recognize Iggy, Robert Horry, Bill Laimbeer, Mark Jackson, Derek Fisher, and AC Green

I don't agree with the titles part (he won 4 after all), but he should have won the MVP in 2001-2005 or so and be in the GOAT conversation. He was too lazy to do that, though. Anyway, here are my takes:

-Tim Duncan is Top-5 all-time and should be in GOAT conversations.
-If Derrick Rose didn't get injured he would won more Regular Season MVPs and also a championship with the Bulls.
-The 2004 Pistons were as good as the 2008 Celtics, but the players don't milk that ring as much as the Celtics' players.

[Full Court]

Weird, OP. Why didn't you include your unpopular opinions that the 2020 Heat were better than the 2025 Pacers? Or that Tom Brady is the biggest choker in NBA history?

[John8204]

I don't agree with the titles part (he won 4 after all), but he should have won the MVP in 2001-2005 or so and be in the GOAT conversation. He was too lazy to do that, though. Anyway, here are my takes:

-Tim Duncan is Top-5 all-time and should be in GOAT conversations.
-If Derrick Rose didn't get injured he would won more Regular Season MVPs and also a championship with the Bulls.
-The 2004 Pistons were as good as the 2008 Celtics, but the players don't milk that ring as much as the Celtics' players.

Orlando would have won multiple titles if he was loyal, Lakers would have won more, Heat would have won more, Celtics would have won more. But he was too lazy/toxic and sabotaged those organizations and teams

[1987_Lakers]

I find it crazy how the two bad calls that went against Utah are never brought up when discussing Game 6

Titles/team results are very overrated when evaluating players

Iggy was the most deserving choice for FMVP

Dirk's 2011 title run is very overrated

Giannis had a top 10 peak of all time

I think that's how most people felt at the time. As the years have gone by, people who never watched or forgot details of that series just assume Iggy shouldn't have won it because they look at the raw stats in that series. I remember Curry getting clamped by Dellavedova at certain points, Warriors were struggling. The moment Iggy got into the starting lineup it changed everything.

[SouBeachTalents]

I think that's how most people felt at the time. As the years have gone by, people who never watched or forgot details of that series just assume Iggy shouldn't have won it because they look at the raw stats in that series. I remember Curry getting clamped by Dellavedova at certain points, Warriors were struggling. The moment Iggy got into the starting lineup it changed everything.

It's genuinely the biggest revisionist history of a subject I can remember. You go back to any thread at the time and Iggy was getting majority support for FMVP over Curry. Now people look at the boxscore and act like that was some complete robbery, that series is a very good example of when stats can be deceptive, or don't tell the whole story.

[Im Still Ballin]

Like Thorpesaurous, I'd take peak McHale over Barkley, Malone, and Dirk. I'd also take him over Davis & maybe even Giannis and KG. I highly value his two-way impact - the rim protection, the defensive versatility, and the resilient half-court post offense. I'd rank him on par with Dirk as the best on offense and only clearly below Duncan and Garnett on defense. Here's how it'd look if I had to rank by tiers:

OFFENSE
Tier 1: Dirk, McHale
Tier 2: Barkley, Davis, Giannis, Duncan
Tier 3: Malone, Garnett

DEFENSE
Tier 1: Duncan, Garnett
Tier 2: Davis, Giannis, McHale
Tier 3: Malone, Dirk, Barkley

I think they're both a little overrated. Malone is a better defender, but he's an on ball defender. He wasn't a good help defender at all for a PF. And offensively, he's consistent, but he lacked the creativity that most great players had.
Barkley is an anomaly. He's as difficult a cover as the leagues probably ever seen. Too quick and crafty for PFs, and too strong for SFs. And at times, he was quicker and had more ball skills than even SFs, and could overpower even the best PFs. But defensively, his size was always an issue. He had to go after everything, shots and rebounds, so much, that he was often out of position. It wasn't as much an issue of effort as it's made out to be. At his peak, I'd definitely take him over Malone. But I don't think either of them is as good as Duncan, or even McHale.

Duncan's game most resemble's McHales. And my preference for both of them stems from their both being better at defending the rim. Obviously there's a lot of projection with McHale not being a number one option, but none of the other guys would have been either with Bird on their team. And only Duncan has proven that he could win it on his own, so if Mchale were a number one option on a team, he wouldn't have to even win a title to prove he was in the neighborhood of Malone and Barkley. Barkley is clearly the hardest to defend in the group.

I know I'm in limited company with my opinion of McHale, and that's completely understandable. It's just something I've believed for a long time. And I don't put much weight into any of those kinds of quotes that players make. But it's always fun to read Barkley's ramblings, and Andrew Toney was a monster.

In terms of historical achievement, it's obviously Malone.

But as someone who saw both guys, if it were my team I'd take McHale in a heartbeat. McHale is one of the most unique ability vs. numbers guys ever because of how much he bent himself for the good of the team.

Malone to me was maybe the best player ever at getting and making the easy shots. Weather it was using his physicality to get way deep in the post to make an easy shot. Outrunning his opponent, which he's really underrated at. And obviously just finding space in that pick and roll. But his game lacked much in the way of counters. If those handful of things were taken away, he didn't adjust well.

McHale's post game could serve as an offensive foundation. It would've been nice had he been a better passer, but that to me is a smaller sin. And defensively the gap is enormous. McHale has a great rep as a rim protector, but is underrated as a perimeter guy before he destroyed his ankle playing through the playoffs on a broken foot.

My fondness of McHale is admittedly higher than pretty much anyone. I'd take him over Barkley for similar defensive reasons. And I'd consider him over Garnett, who's an all time defender and an excellent offensive player, but his game on that end has some of the same flaws as Malone's in that while it's very versatile, it lacked some of the forcefulness that McHale's post game had that feels more foundational.

McHale would be a fascinating player as a center in the current league. He could be a switching machine. Something like Jo Noah on that end, and a more efficient Zack Randolph on the other.

I am saying Malone isn't an offensive foundation. And I know that seems weird considering the ridiculous number of points he scored.

But it's your second point that is the reason. I do care how easy the points were, because it's exactly that reason that I have concerns running an offense through him. And I think it defines some of his post season failures because teams knew they could change looks at him and effect his play. I think that's the reason so many of the big situations those Jazz teams were in, the ball wound up in Stockton or even Jeff Hornacek's hands. They may make a decision to go to Karl, but it was more often or not their decision.

And like I said, if we're doing a historical list, some kind of a ranking, then Malone is clearly ahead. But if I'm running the team and I get to choose between these two skill sets, I'd take McHale.

Originally Posted by Thorpesaurous View Post
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/sho...1#post14733610

McHale injured his foot that season and was never quite the same defender. This young McHale could switch onto perimeter guys about as effectively as any big I've ever seen, like in the KG range. I think McHale is criminally underrated, not in terms of historically, like achievement wise, but in terms of skill set. I would personally take him over Barkley and Karl Malone. And because of his post game consistency, I could be talked into over KG, from a team building perspective, if you caught me on the right night. His numbers just don't pop because of the quality of team he played on. The only real weakness is he wasn't a great passer. It was in him. You'd see it in spots. But there was so much ball going around on that team, and he was so good in the post, that when it did get into him, it didn't often come out. I think he could stretch his range out some, and would be a more willing passer in a different setting, and would be a great center in the modern game, because he'd score super efficiently with the spacing, and he'd be super switchable defensively.

McHale is tricky, because of the careers of other guys he can't possibly rank above 7 or so. But if I'm starting a team, I'd take him over most of the guys ranked ahead of him based on his peak and particular skill set.

In response to:

People usually have Duncan as the greatest PF of all time... then there's the giant mess of trying to rank KG, Dirk, Barkley and Malone (lately it seems KG and Dirk are more often than not placed above Barkley and Malone due to the spectacular second half of their careers, but it's still close enough to be debatable). Throw in Bob Pettit somewhere and you've got 6 PFs in the 25ish greatest players of all time.

But where do you rank Kevin McHale, who used to be seen as one of the all-time greatest at the position? Is he your next on the list? How would you round out your top 10 all time PF list?

Just to set the context, Kevin McHale is a 7 time all-star, 3 time champion, 2 time 6th man of the year, 3 time member of the all defensive first team, and widely acknowledged as one of the (if not the) greatest low post scorers in the history of the game, including a year scoring 26 ppg on 66 TS% (the words "second option" don't do him justice, and he probably would have been the first option on most teams... certainly he would be on most teams today).

[1987_Lakers]

- Magic should have won FMVP in '88, probably not unpopular, but nobody ever talks about it.

- Kobe wouldn't even be top 20 if he never played for the Lakers, maybe not even top 25.

- Dennis Rodman gets praised for his cancerous ways as a player. Shouldn't have made top 75.

- Jason Kidd is the GOAT defensive PG

- Steve Nash's back to back MVPs were deserving. Shaq in particular has made it a mission campaigning that they were not.

[Im Still Ballin]

Dirk probably should've won MVP in 2005-06.

[j3lademaster]

The 77' Ring is the greatest championship of all-time.

Shaquille O'Neal was not the most dominant player of all-time, rather he was the most toxic that cost his teams more titles than he won.

Paul Arizin, Dolph Schayes, and George Mikan all belong in respective top ten lists based on positions.

The Basketball Hall of Fame needs to recognize Iggy, Robert Horry, Bill Laimbeer, Mark Jackson, Derek Fisher, and AC Green

The catch 22 with Shaq is that the reason his teams were in positions to compete for titles every season was because he was so dominant in the first place.

[1987_Lakers]

Dirk probably should've won MVP in 2005-06.

I’ll never forget Dirk receiving his ‘07 MVP award just days after losing to the 8th seed Warriors in the first round.

[1987_Lakers]

[highwhey]

Like Thorpesaurous, I'd take peak McHale over Barkley, Malone, and Dirk. I'd also take him over Davis & maybe even Giannis and KG. I highly value his two-way impact - the rim protection, the defensive versatility, and the resilient half-court post offense. I'd rank him on par with Dirk as the best on offense and only clearly below Duncan and Garnett on defense. Here's how it'd look if I had to rank by tiers:

OFFENSE
Tier 1: Dirk, McHale
Tier 2: Barkley, Davis, Giannis, Duncan
Tier 3: Malone, Garnett

DEFENSE
Tier 1: Duncan, Garnett
Tier 2: Davis, Giannis, McHale
Tier 3: Malone, Dirk, Barkley

do you just go around saving people's posts? this is some weird level obsession considering this forum has no search function.

[Axe]

It's genuinely the biggest revisionist history of a subject I can remember. You go back to any thread at the time and Iggy was getting majority support for FMVP over Curry. Now people look at the boxscore and act like that was some complete robbery, that series is a very good example of when stats can be deceptive, or don't tell the whole story.

Lol those same people also probably tried to prop up his two high-scoring games in the 2021 play-ins where his team ended up losing. Can't win at all without a decent sidekick. Same story goes for other superstars as well.

[Im Still Ballin]

do you just go around saving people's posts? this is some weird level obsession considering this forum has no search function.

I used the DuckDuckGo search engine to find all McHale threads on ISH. There's like less than ten, and Thorpesaurous has posted the same take on several of them. He's a highly respected poster who I believe played college ball. I think his opinion is worth mentioning if it aligns with my perspective.

Google sucks for searching ISH.

[John8204]

The catch 22 with Shaq is that the reason his teams were in positions to compete for titles every season was because he was so dominant in the first place.

He "dominated" until he came across a better team and then he got swept. He got swept 7 or 8 times..Wilt gets trashed for "choking" but he was losing long series to super teams.