Here's the list:
10-Kobe.
9-Duncan.
8-Shaq.
7-Larry.
6-Wilt.
5-Magic.
4-Russell.
3-Kareem.
2-LBJ.
1-MJ.
Thoughts on this top 10? At first glance, it looks pretty solid to me. I might put TD ahead of Shaq, but I very well could be in the minority on that one. Hakeem-who I think is criminally underrated-clocks in @ 11.
I know Stan will have Magic #1. We get it.
Quote:
He is arguably the greatest player of all time. He could not be defended.
My hot take is that Kareem is actually the greatest player of all time, not MJ or LBJ or Wilt.
I'm sort of with you. For me it's close between MJ and Jabbar. But I think Jabbar is terribly underrated. When the sky hook was working it was impossible to defend. The scoring record and 6 MVP awards attest to that. He was so good for so long.
As a Laker fan who watched every game of that era, I think 1999-2002 Shaq was completely unstoppable force. To be that powerful and have that agility was simply incredible.
He didn’t have as many great years as MJ or Lebron or Wilt or Kareem or even Duncan, but when he was on tippy top of his game he took over in a way I’ve never seen before or since. (Reminiscent of the year Barry Bonds took that insane number of walks because no one would dare pitch to him.)
As for The Great Fundamental...
David Robinson got hurt the year before he was drafted...that team tanked and won the lottery and somehow luckboxed into the twin towers.
Back then, The Admiral was a dominant center, I mean truly great, and Duncan was Robin to Robinson's Batman. Popovich lucked himself into a dominant team, because he got Robinson and Duncan together because of injury, to make no mention of Sean Elliott.
It's debatable that David Robinson or Duncan was a greater player. But for my money, Olajuwon was greater than them both.
To me, Wilt, Russell, Kareem and Shaq are Hakeem's peers. I was never a Rockets fan but having seen all but Wilt and Russell play in my life, if I had to pick a center in their prime, it would probably be Hakeem.
The kids won't know. He was an artist. Shaq was a bull, but I could make the argument Olajuwon was better as a complete player.
As for Lebron, he's closer to 5th all-time than he is to MJ.
The debate is stupid, Lebron will never be as great as His Airness. It's not about stats, you simply just had to see each play in their primes. It was all about winning titles with MJ. He could not be denied. The debate between MJ and Lebron is like the debate between Tom Brady and Peyton Manning. Both objectively great. Both champions.
But MJ had something else that drove him to greater heights as a champion. And to be honest, MJ could've easily won 8 championships in a row, in an era of great parity and all-time great basketball players.
Without MJ, I believe Stockton and Malone would've bagged at least 2 or 3 titles.
If Malone gets those 2 rings, the argument is should he be higher than Duncan. Malone the individual player could stand among this top 10.
Stockton was amazing as well. Not top 10, but probably top 20. If we're talking top 5 points he's in there.
Sorry Nike and ESPN, I ain't buying your hype. Find some other suckers.
You're a nutcase, take off the L.A. blinders.
The Russell/Wilt games against each other were awesome.
I think the Athletic's list put too much importance on championships and not enough importance on great individual players, especially guards, who could play in any era.
My top 10 in order would be:
Kareem
Wilt
MJ
Magic
Bird
Russell
Oscar
Lebron
Dr. J
Kobe
My next 10 in order would be Jerry West, Bob Cousy, Isiah Thomas, Tiny Archibald, Pete Maravich, Connie Hawkins, Allen Iverson, John Stockton, Bill Walton, Elgin Baylor.
Connie Hawkins isn't on the top 75 list and Carmelo Anthony is? That's just wrong.
Jordan, Magic, Oscar, Wilt, Russell, Kareem, Bird, LeBron, Kobe, Olajuwon
Hakeem makes my list and I think he is criminally underrated. In my opinion he is the most skilled big man ever when it came to his offensive game. On top of that he was a dominant defender. One of the best players I've ever seen.
Awful case of recency bias.
I would have him over Shaq and maybe even top 5. He was close to a one man dynasty for 20 years. Truly an all time great player.
I think a good debate is how the best "modern" big man is between Duncan, Shaq and Hakeem. I think its close but I take Duncan but also view all of them a top 10 all time.
The 03 Spurs he had the burned out shell of David Robinson. The 14 Spurs he had a still green Kawhi Leonard.
Most of the other guys on these lists that had dynasties had multiple players in the top 50. Duncan effectively had one such player for his first title (and even then, one of the things people pointed out back then was that Robinson showed rare humility by conceding the leading role on the team to Duncan as Duncan was better). Unless you argue Tony Parker or Manu Ginobili were top 50 players all time as well (I'm not even sure they'd make a top 100 list - though Ginobili would for international/Olympics play where he was a different player entirely), you have to give Duncan his due.
Awful case of recency bias.
Insane recency bias. I think his team has made one conference finals and, if I'm not mistaken, they did not win a game. When they do another list in 25 years he will not be on it unless he finds some success.
I would have him over Shaq and maybe even top 5. He was close to a one man dynasty for 20 years. Truly an all time great player.
I think a good debate is how the best "modern" big man is between Duncan, Shaq and Hakeem. I think its close but I take Duncan but also view all of them a top 10 all time.
I agree and its a more fun debate that the constant Jordan/LeBron stuff.
IMO Duncan is the #1 PF of all time and in terms of big men overall, probably no worse than 3rd or 4th (Wilt, Kareem, Russell maybe Shaq but definitely debatable).
He's probably my favorite player post-Jordan.
No shot. 2x MVP, 5x champion (in 3 separate decades and 2 different eras of basketball), 10x First Team All NBA and the accolades go on and on.
Wow, that's a weird take.
Duncan is not overrated. And I actually never thought of him as PF. He was usually covering the other team's C and vice versa. And he was prolific on both ends of the floor.
But McHale is undoubtedly underrated. A tremendous scorer.
Wilt would still be great, but I think Jabbar passed him because of athleticism and quickness. Could Wilt defend against modern players aside from centers? Would he have been a rim protector in the modern sense? I wonder. For his era though, he was dominant, better than Russell, who had way more talent around him.
LeBron
Bill Russell
Kareem
Wilt
Magic
Bird
Duncan
Hakeem
Shaq
I have Kobe at 11 and I give The Athletic credit for not falling into that crazy mindset that Kobe is somehow closer to MJ and LeBron than he is to Jerry West and Steph Curry. Hakeem might be the best defensive player of all-time. I have him ahead of Shaq, while acknowledging he wasn’t as peak level dominant.
Yeah...
Sorry Nike and ESPN, I ain't buying your hype. Find some other suckers.
Find one person that agrees with you.
It is ridiculous to say about Jordan, but the Nike hype around LeBron might be accurate.
The guy was nicknamed "The King" and had a shoe deal before being drafted. I think there is something to the fact that LeBron himself, and Nike, and the NBA all wanted him to bolt Cleveland for a better situation in Miami asap.
I think LeBron being a great player and also taking a shortcut to winning so he could be considered among the players with multiple rings are both true statements.
Otherwise, why did he HAVE to leave Cleveland? He had already gone to a Finals. Maybe it would have taken some years to get one, or maybe he wouldn't have gotten there at all, but that's the point. All parties involved couldn't risk it playing out.
Was thinking this as well. I was never a big fan of Shaq - respected his game, and when he gave a shit he was unreal, but I'm taking Hakeem over him if i'm building a team.
The Blazers made the Western Conference Finals in the '18-'19 season & got swept by the Dubs.
Quote:
Duncan was clearly the best team on the 99 & 03 Spurs. This 'He was Robinson's Robin' is absurd. He was Batman.
The 03 Spurs he had the burned out shell of David Robinson. The 14 Spurs he had a still green Kawhi Leonard.
Most of the other guys on these lists that had dynasties had multiple players in the top 50. Duncan effectively had one such player for his first title (and even then, one of the things people pointed out back then was that Robinson showed rare humility by conceding the leading role on the team to Duncan as Duncan was better). Unless you argue Tony Parker or Manu Ginobili were top 50 players all time as well (I'm not even sure they'd make a top 100 list - though Ginobili would for international/Olympics play where he was a different player entirely), you have to give Duncan his due.
FStubbs, & he's an '06 OT Game 7 WCF loss away from potentially winning 3 straight titles.
Duncan was a beast.
I have been pounding the table on that for years....Russell is 2 MJ 3
LBJ is great, but the Magic Man revolutionized basketball. I've seen a floor general like him. That Laker fast break - "Show Time" - was a thing of beauty.
So I am putting the Magic Man #2.
And I don't care what anyone says, I was very young back in the '80s, but Larry Bird is the GREATEST shooter I have ever seen. I don't care if Curry can shoot 35 footers. Bird could have done the same thing if that was required. He was as clutch as they came.
Bird was also one of the greatest passers I have ever seen. I forgot how good he was, an Instagram highlight reel of only passes from Bird came up in my Instagram feed this past year…it was simply amazing.
Wasn't really a main point I was trying to make, I just really hate Popovich and think he's overrated as a coach. He was terrible before the twin towers came along.
There’s just no way he’s overrated.
Quote:
but Jerry West needs some support in this.
LBJ is great, but the Magic Man revolutionized basketball. I've seen a floor general like him. That Laker fast break - "Show Time" - was a thing of beauty.
So I am putting the Magic Man #2.
And I don't care what anyone says, I was very young back in the '80s, but Larry Bird is the GREATEST shooter I have ever seen. I don't care if Curry can shoot 35 footers. Bird could have done the same thing if that was required. He was as clutch as they came.
Bird was also one of the greatest passers I have ever seen. I forgot how good he was, an Instagram highlight reel of only passes from Bird came up in my Instagram feed this past year…it was simply amazing.
Yes, Bird gets lost in this debate sauce. He was incredible. He was a tremendous all-around player. LBJ is a better 1x1 defender than Bird was, but I have no problem defending Bird vs LBJ is every other aspect of the game. Bird was a better passer, a better shooter, better free throw shooter, better rebounder.
Like I said, he's the best shooter I've ever seen. If I need a shot to win a game for my life, I'm not taking Curry over Bird. NFW.
Quote:
In comment 15612740 bw in dc said:
Quote:
but Jerry West needs some support in this.
LBJ is great, but the Magic Man revolutionized basketball. I've seen a floor general like him. That Laker fast break - "Show Time" - was a thing of beauty.
So I am putting the Magic Man #2.
And I don't care what anyone says, I was very young back in the '80s, but Larry Bird is the GREATEST shooter I have ever seen. I don't care if Curry can shoot 35 footers. Bird could have done the same thing if that was required. He was as clutch as they came.
Bird was also one of the greatest passers I have ever seen. I forgot how good he was, an Instagram highlight reel of only passes from Bird came up in my Instagram feed this past year…it was simply amazing.
Yes, Bird gets lost in this debate sauce. He was incredible. He was a tremendous all-around player. LBJ is a better 1x1 defender than Bird was, but I have no problem defending Bird vs LBJ is every other aspect of the game. Bird was a better passer, a better shooter, better free throw shooter, better rebounder.
Like I said, he's the best shooter I've ever seen. If I need a shot to win a game for my life, I'm not taking Curry over Bird. NFW.
LeBron is miles ahead of Bird in terms of penetrating and finishing at the rim. Bird might be a slightly better passer, but LeBron’s ball handling allows him to play a true PG role that Bird couldn’t.
In terms of efficiency + volume, no one has been a better shooter in the paint than LeBron over the past 25 years (since we have official PbP shooting charts after 1997) outside of Shaq.
It’s why he’s scored more points in the NBA than anyone else despite having a hot/cold jumper. Bird was a far better shooter and possibly the most clutch, just an awesome player. I think LeBron has the edge as an overall player though, not even taking into account the far superior longevity.
KG was 17 on The Athletic's list. A bit too high for me; he's ranked ahead of Moses, Elgin, Chuck, Julius, & Dirk. I think I'd put them all ahead of KG, & I loved KG's game.
Yes, Bird gets lost in this debate sauce. He was incredible. He was a tremendous all-around player. LBJ is a better 1x1 defender than Bird was, but I have no problem defending Bird vs LBJ is every other aspect of the game. Bird was a better passer, a better shooter, better free throw shooter, better rebounder.
Like I said, he's the best shooter I've ever seen. If I need a shot to win a game for my life, I'm not taking Curry over Bird. NFW.
LeBron is miles ahead of Bird in terms of penetrating and finishing at the rim. Bird might be a slightly better passer, but LeBron’s ball handling allows him to play a true PG role that Bird couldn’t.
In terms of efficiency + volume, no one has been a better shooter in the paint than LeBron over the past 25 years (since we have official PbP shooting charts after 1997) outside of Shaq.
It’s why he’s scored more points in the NBA than anyone else despite having a hot/cold jumper. Bird was a far better shooter and possibly the most clutch, just an awesome player. I think LeBron has the edge as an overall player though, not even taking into account the far superior longevity.
Bird played in a different era where the game was much more challenging inside the paint. Bird was unbelievable with both hands - he once scored 47 in Portland scoring mostly with his left hand (because that's what he told the team he wanted to try) - so I think he would be incredibly more efficient in today's style.
I agree LBJ was a better ball-handler. But Bird revolutionized the game as a point-forward by dictating the game from the wing with the ball. One of the great entry passers I have ever seen.
In an honest moment, if you asked people who really studied the game to pick any two players they would want to shoot the last shot to win a game, I would imagine a large % would choose MJ and Bird. That is a big, big deal.
Wilt would still be great, but I think Jabbar passed him because of athleticism and quickness. Could Wilt defend against modern players aside from centers? Would he have been a rim protector in the modern sense? I wonder. For his era though, he was dominant, better than Russell, who had way more talent around him.
I agree on Russell. He makes these lists because of all the championships and he was a great defensive player, but he never had to carry the Celtics.
And yes, Wilt could. He broke into pro basketball playing guard for the Globetrotters. Wilt could handle the ball.
Hey, remember me? "Mr. Basketball?"
I agree LBJ was a better ball-handler. But Bird revolutionized the game as a point-forward by dictating the game from the wing with the ball. One of the great entry passers I have ever seen.
In an honest moment, if you asked people who really studied the game to pick any two players they would want to shoot the last shot to win a game, I would imagine a large % would choose MJ and Bird. That is a big, big deal.
Bird is an amazing offensive player, I think the most versatile of all-time. He's the kind of guy that could have thrived in the 60s or in today's game without too many adjustments. He wasn't just great with the ball but he's one of the most impactful off-ball players ever offensively. His movement off the ball to come around screens and hit jumpers was deadly. He paved the way for Reggie and Curry to scare teams off-the-ball like that. But Bird was also an amazing touch passer, so defenses didn't know whether to worry about his all-time jumper or all-time passing ability when he got the pass off a screen. He's in my Top 10 for sure.
I just think LeBron is better. For all the talk about Bird being a better clutch shooter, LeBron's playoff record is more consistent than Bird's and he has been a better big game player overall (his Elimination Game/Game 7/etc. numbers are amazing). Bird is definitely a better pure clutch shooter, but give me LeBron in the biggest games. Bird was more prone to poor shooting games against playoff Ds, and wasn't nearly as good of a defender.
In comment 15615247 HomerJones45 said:
Quote: Wilt would still be great, but I think Jabbar passed him because of athleticism and quickness. Could Wilt defend against modern players aside from centers? Would he have been a rim protector in the modern sense? I wonder. For his era though, he was dominant, better than Russell, who had way more talent around him.
Yes he did especially if you let him palm the ball, carry and travel like the "modern" players do.
I agree on Russell. He makes these lists because of all the championships and he was a great defensive player, but he never had to carry the Celtics.
And yes, Wilt could. He broke into pro basketball playing guard for the Globetrotters. Wilt could handle the ball.
Bill Russell was absolutely the #1 reason by far why the Celtics won it every year. The Celtics defense went from below-average to historically great the minute he arrived. He carried that team.
The Celtics had talent but the Russell's teammate's > Wilt's teammates stuff is not true. Russell had the more talented teams in the early 60s, Wilt had the more talented teams the 2nd half of the decade. Russell still beat him every time besides '67. Mainly because he played a smarter brand of basketball.
As far as athletes who could translate to today, I think Russell would fit in almost as easily as Wilt. He was clearly quicker than Wilt and capable of going out to the perimeter defensively to make a play. His "switchability" as a 6'10" insanely athletic Center + his BBIQ would make him unfair on defense. Offensively, he would kill as a PnR and Transition finisher. But he could also handle the ball and pass well for a Center, so he's not just a lob machine type.
Bill Russell is the most underappreciated athlete in this country's history.