if the NBA made a new top 50 list.. who would replace who?

[MJPac]

Re: if the NBA made a new top 50 list.. who would replace who?

First let me say that I'm not a *****, I give credit where credit is due. With that said there are several players who should have been excluded from that list, mainly roleplayers from the 40's and 50's who tagged along during the Celtics' championship run. But someone earlier said that Scottie Pippen was in the lower portion of the 50, and that if players from today were added, he might very well have been replaced.....not to be disrespectful but wut r u smokin????

Pippen would probably make the top 30 of that list, possibly even 25 if it was ranked. Take Pippen from his prime and place him in today's NBA and you would have the best forward in the league next to Tim Duncan. Pippen was an offensive threat, not to mention he was also a TOP, let me repeat that..TOP defensive player. He ran the court like few before him and led a sub-par Bulls team to the 2nd round playoffs game 7 against a far supererior Knicks squad at the time. The only perimeter player I would currently consider taking over Pippen in his prime is Kobe.

Now for players today who deserve to ranked among the 50 greatest who aren't currently among them?? Very few as of now. I would say Tim Duncan, due to the fact that he led his team to the championship in his sohmore season despite the fact that it was the infamous lockout year. He's the complete player, has great leadership, an MVP award under his belt and a championship to match. I'd say he's a likley candidate for the top 50 of all time.

In addition...I'd also add Kobe. 3 consecutive titles is sufficient enough wouldn't you say.

Payton would probably make it as well. He has at least 8 GOOD years behind him.

Kidd also. He was always a floor general and only until last season has he been noticed for his talent, but the fact that he led that Nets team to the finals single handedly, not to mention a hair away from winning MVP can't be ignored. Kidd has achieved greatness, and there are few in today's NBA who have.

The last player of today's league to make the all time 50.... Iverson. There are many players currently better than him in the NBA......BUT......his 2000-01 season was unforgettable. Like Bill Walton, he should be on the list not because he had a great career, but because he had a truly special year during his career that stands out.

Kemp should not have made it. There was a time when he was arguabley the best PF in the league believe it or not, but his career is very shallow. He was electrifying and he was talented....but his high point was short and he really has nothing to show for it.

Dominque should definitley be on there despite the fact that he has no MVP's or championships. He's one of the greatest offensive players EVER. This guy was a pure scorer and he kept it up for 10 years!! Put him on the list

Reggie Miller should also be on the list. I think he had enough good years and even more memories that qualify him.

Lastly....Grant Hill. Sadly he should not be on the team. If his career were to never be hindered by injury he would have unquestionabley been the league's embassador after MJ, but that didn't happen. This guy was AMAZING, but for how long...4..5 years? Not enough to be considered great.

[MJPac]

Re: if the NBA made a new top 50 list.. who would replace who?

First let me say that I'm not a *****, I give credit where credit is due. With that said there are several players who should have been excluded from that list, mainly roleplayers from the 40's and 50's who tagged along during the Celtics' championship run. But someone earlier said that Scottie Pippen was in the lower portion of the 50, and that if players from today were added, he might very well have been replaced.....not to be disrespectful but wut r u smokin????

Pippen would probably make the top 30 of that list, possibly even 25 if it was ranked. Take Pippen from his prime and place him in today's NBA and you would have the best forward in the league next to Tim Duncan. Pippen was an offensive threat, not to mention he was also a TOP, let me repeat that..TOP defensive player. He ran the court like few before him and led a sub-par Bulls team to the 2nd round playoffs game 7 against a far supererior Knicks squad at the time. The only perimeter player I would currently consider taking over Pippen in his prime is Kobe.

Now for players today who deserve to ranked among the 50 greatest who aren't currently among them?? Very few as of now. I would say Tim Duncan, due to the fact that he led his team to the championship in his sohmore season despite the fact that it was the infamous lockout year. He's the complete player, has great leadership, an MVP award under his belt and a championship to match. I'd say he's a likley candidate for the top 50 of all time.

In addition...I'd also add Kobe. 3 consecutive titles is sufficient enough wouldn't you say.

Payton would probably make it as well. He has at least 8 GOOD years behind him.

Kidd also. He was always a floor general and only until last season has he been noticed for his talent, but the fact that he led that Nets team to the finals single handedly, not to mention a hair away from winning MVP can't be ignored. Kidd has achieved greatness, and there are few in today's NBA who have.

The last player of today's league to make the all time 50.... Iverson. There are many players currently better than him in the NBA......BUT......his 2000-01 season was unforgettable. Like Bill Walton, he should be on the list not because he had a great career, but because he had a truly special year during his career that stands out.

Kemp should not have made it. There was a time when he was arguabley the best PF in the league believe it or not, but his career is very shallow. He was electrifying and he was talented....but his high point was short and he really has nothing to show for it.

Dominque should definitley be on there despite the fact that he has no MVP's or championships. He's one of the greatest offensive players EVER. This guy was a pure scorer and he kept it up for 10 years!! Put him on the list

Reggie Miller should also be on the list. I think he had enough good years and even more memories that qualify him.

Lastly....Grant Hill. Sadly he should not be on the team. If his career were to never be hindered by injury he would have unquestionabley been the league's embassador after MJ, but that didn't happen. This guy was AMAZING, but for how long...4..5 years? Not enough to be considered great.

[jod23]

Re: if the NBA made a new top 50 list.. who would replace who?

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
So what you're saying is that Duncan isn't as good as Pippen? Is this because he wasn't fortunate enough to be playing with MJ? I guarantee you that if Duncan came into the L when Pippen did, and if he went to the Bulls instead of Pip his rookie year, then the Bulls would have started winning championships right away, as opposed to when Pippen matured as a player.

Duncan came out of the gates fast. This is his 6th year in the L. He came in averaging 20-10. His career numbers are 22.9ppg, 12.3rbg, 3.2apg, 2.47bpg. He is so solid fundamentally.

Pippen took a while to get to where he's at, or was. He's got good all-around numbers, but he doesn't compare to Duncan's skills.

You say that Pippen and MJ was the greatest duo, I have no problems with that (except for maybe Shaq and Kobe now), but if it were TD and MJ, then that would have been the very greatest duo ever. No one would be able to touch them. Both demand double teams. It would have been a great inside-out game.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Duncan and Pippen are completely different players so it's hard to judge which of the two players is better. Pippen in his prime was awesome and won 6 titles so he can hold that over Duncan. If the Top 50 of all time were redone today, IMO the only players who may come into the top 50 would be Gary Payton and Tim Duncan. (neither replacing Pip though, Pippen has a well deserved spot) Iverson, Kobe, T-Mac, KG, given more time may also have a case.

Just on Iverson I realised that he is I think 4th all time for most scoring titles with 3. Jordan has 10, Wilt 7 and Gervin I believe had 4.

I will dismiss your Shaq and Kobe comment on being the best 1,2 punch. Their is no doubt in my mind that either Bull's three-peat team would squash the Lakers current 3-peat team. MJ and Pip...the best 1-2 punch you will ever see no question.

[jod23]

Re: if the NBA made a new top 50 list.. who would replace who?

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
So what you're saying is that Duncan isn't as good as Pippen? Is this because he wasn't fortunate enough to be playing with MJ? I guarantee you that if Duncan came into the L when Pippen did, and if he went to the Bulls instead of Pip his rookie year, then the Bulls would have started winning championships right away, as opposed to when Pippen matured as a player.

Duncan came out of the gates fast. This is his 6th year in the L. He came in averaging 20-10. His career numbers are 22.9ppg, 12.3rbg, 3.2apg, 2.47bpg. He is so solid fundamentally.

Pippen took a while to get to where he's at, or was. He's got good all-around numbers, but he doesn't compare to Duncan's skills.

You say that Pippen and MJ was the greatest duo, I have no problems with that (except for maybe Shaq and Kobe now), but if it were TD and MJ, then that would have been the very greatest duo ever. No one would be able to touch them. Both demand double teams. It would have been a great inside-out game.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Duncan and Pippen are completely different players so it's hard to judge which of the two players is better. Pippen in his prime was awesome and won 6 titles so he can hold that over Duncan. If the Top 50 of all time were redone today, IMO the only players who may come into the top 50 would be Gary Payton and Tim Duncan. (neither replacing Pip though, Pippen has a well deserved spot) Iverson, Kobe, T-Mac, KG, given more time may also have a case.

Just on Iverson I realised that he is I think 4th all time for most scoring titles with 3. Jordan has 10, Wilt 7 and Gervin I believe had 4.

I will dismiss your Shaq and Kobe comment on being the best 1,2 punch. Their is no doubt in my mind that either Bull's three-peat team would squash the Lakers current 3-peat team. MJ and Pip...the best 1-2 punch you will ever see no question.

[ZigZag]

Re: if the NBA made a new top 50 list.. who would replace who?

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
The three biggest omissions in my opinion were Joe Dumars, Dominique Wilkins and Dennis Rodman.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

<font color="red"> True atleast look put Dominique in. He was an all-star for heaven's sake!!!!!! Not that Joe and Rodman shouldn't be there but out the three Nique stands out the most. </font>

[ZigZag]

Re: if the NBA made a new top 50 list.. who would replace who?

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
The three biggest omissions in my opinion were Joe Dumars, Dominique Wilkins and Dennis Rodman.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

<font color="red"> True atleast look put Dominique in. He was an all-star for heaven's sake!!!!!! Not that Joe and Rodman shouldn't be there but out the three Nique stands out the most. </font>

[Marsh1081]

Re: if the NBA made a new top 50 list.. who would replace who?

All you Pip haters need to think about this. I really dont care for the guy either and ill admit he hasnt done s*h*i*t since he left the bulls but he is getting pretty old now and its a fact all players slow down when they get older EVEN JORDAN. He still plays hard-nosed defense night in, night out and he distributes the ball well. His role as a player has changed with the blazers hes not asked to shoot like he used to, and he may not be the best leader but he was always right hand man to the best leader in the business.

When he was with the Bulls he was the perfect complement to Jordan, another guy that could put up big numbers and keep defenses from collapsing onto Jordan. Jordan was good enough he could have won a couple titles without Pip but definently not six. Guys like T-mac and Kobe will one day be good enough to be on a top 50 list like that. Kobe is legitimently good enough now hes already won 3 titles but he never woulda had one if it wasnt for Shaq. Shaq should be on a new list for someone like Walton. Payton should be on for wilkens. Nique should be somewhere. Garnett hasnt won anything EVER i dont care what anyone says. He cant lead the t-wolves past the 1st round and wont unless they give him a better team. I dont think Duncan would be as good if it werent for David Robinson. Even though he is old and not effective teams still respect his prescense.

[Marsh1081]

Re: if the NBA made a new top 50 list.. who would replace who?

All you Pip haters need to think about this. I really dont care for the guy either and ill admit he hasnt done s*h*i*t since he left the bulls but he is getting pretty old now and its a fact all players slow down when they get older EVEN JORDAN. He still plays hard-nosed defense night in, night out and he distributes the ball well. His role as a player has changed with the blazers hes not asked to shoot like he used to, and he may not be the best leader but he was always right hand man to the best leader in the business.

When he was with the Bulls he was the perfect complement to Jordan, another guy that could put up big numbers and keep defenses from collapsing onto Jordan. Jordan was good enough he could have won a couple titles without Pip but definently not six. Guys like T-mac and Kobe will one day be good enough to be on a top 50 list like that. Kobe is legitimently good enough now hes already won 3 titles but he never woulda had one if it wasnt for Shaq. Shaq should be on a new list for someone like Walton. Payton should be on for wilkens. Nique should be somewhere. Garnett hasnt won anything EVER i dont care what anyone says. He cant lead the t-wolves past the 1st round and wont unless they give him a better team. I dont think Duncan would be as good if it werent for David Robinson. Even though he is old and not effective teams still respect his prescense.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Re: if the NBA made a new top 50 list.. who would replace who?

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

The Lockout season will forever have an * next to it's name not only for it being a shortened season but it was also post Jordan. Same goes for Houston's two championships. Therefore Duncan's championship means nothing.

Im also sick of everyone saying Pippen won 6 titles because of MJ. Wrong....they were a one two punch, the best 1,2 the game has ever seen. Pippen during the 90's was indeed the second best players in the league. No question.

His place is safe in the top 50. Duncan certainly poses no threat.

Duncan has 1 title, probably wouldnt even have it had Jordan no retired.

Pippen has 6 titles.

Nuff said.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">


how the hell can you say "duncan's ring" means nothing just becuase it was a lockout season and it was post jordan. So any season that jordan doesnt play in, the championship doesnt matter? And the season was shortened but playoffs was the same. It WAS DUNCAN WHO WHUPPED SHAQ AND KOBE'S ***, WHUPPED LATRELL AND HOUSTON'S ***, WHUPPED PORTLAND'S *** in the playoffs. How does a shorten season have anything to do with it? What if the season was longer duncan woulda gotten tired or what?

And also, i'm sick and tired of people judging one's greatness with rings. if someone was the BEST PLAYER on a championship team, then you can use that argument. But you cant use it for pip, jordan was the MAIN reason for the ring, not pip.

and you say pip has 6 duncan has 1. so what??? DUNCAN LED HIS TEAM TO 1. pip led his team to 0. If you go by ammount of rings, then Steve Kerr is better then Clyde Drexler, Kerr has 4, Clyde only has 1.

I know pip was the second best player on the bulls had contributed alot, but he was REPLACIBLE, theo nly one not replacable on the bulls championship team was jordan himself.

So when you can't use "rings" as part of the argument because pip wanst the bset player on those teams, the next best thing is to compare individual skills and success.. Duncan has won more awards, has better stats and has proven to be more clutch IN PLAYOFFS THEN PIPPEN. Duncan hit shot after shot in game 5 of the finals to seal the victory.

Pippen is great player, no doubt, but top 30 in history of the NBA? hell no.

jordan
bird
magic
kareem
wilt
bill russell
moses malone
karl malone
barkley
ewing
olajuwon
shaq
gary payton
duncan

these guys are all better then pippen individually and thats just off the top of my head, i'm sure i can think of more fill out the list of 50 if u want me to.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Re: if the NBA made a new top 50 list.. who would replace who?

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

The Lockout season will forever have an * next to it's name not only for it being a shortened season but it was also post Jordan. Same goes for Houston's two championships. Therefore Duncan's championship means nothing.

Im also sick of everyone saying Pippen won 6 titles because of MJ. Wrong....they were a one two punch, the best 1,2 the game has ever seen. Pippen during the 90's was indeed the second best players in the league. No question.

His place is safe in the top 50. Duncan certainly poses no threat.

Duncan has 1 title, probably wouldnt even have it had Jordan no retired.

Pippen has 6 titles.

Nuff said.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">


how the hell can you say "duncan's ring" means nothing just becuase it was a lockout season and it was post jordan. So any season that jordan doesnt play in, the championship doesnt matter? And the season was shortened but playoffs was the same. It WAS DUNCAN WHO WHUPPED SHAQ AND KOBE'S ***, WHUPPED LATRELL AND HOUSTON'S ***, WHUPPED PORTLAND'S *** in the playoffs. How does a shorten season have anything to do with it? What if the season was longer duncan woulda gotten tired or what?

And also, i'm sick and tired of people judging one's greatness with rings. if someone was the BEST PLAYER on a championship team, then you can use that argument. But you cant use it for pip, jordan was the MAIN reason for the ring, not pip.

and you say pip has 6 duncan has 1. so what??? DUNCAN LED HIS TEAM TO 1. pip led his team to 0. If you go by ammount of rings, then Steve Kerr is better then Clyde Drexler, Kerr has 4, Clyde only has 1.

I know pip was the second best player on the bulls had contributed alot, but he was REPLACIBLE, theo nly one not replacable on the bulls championship team was jordan himself.

So when you can't use "rings" as part of the argument because pip wanst the bset player on those teams, the next best thing is to compare individual skills and success.. Duncan has won more awards, has better stats and has proven to be more clutch IN PLAYOFFS THEN PIPPEN. Duncan hit shot after shot in game 5 of the finals to seal the victory.

Pippen is great player, no doubt, but top 30 in history of the NBA? hell no.

jordan
bird
magic
kareem
wilt
bill russell
moses malone
karl malone
barkley
ewing
olajuwon
shaq
gary payton
duncan

these guys are all better then pippen individually and thats just off the top of my head, i'm sure i can think of more fill out the list of 50 if u want me to.

[jod23]

Re: if the NBA made a new top 50 list.. who would replace who?

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

how the hell can you say "duncan's ring" means nothing just becuase it was a lockout season and it was post jordan. So any season that jordan doesnt play in, the championship doesnt matter? And the season was shortened but playoffs was the same. It WAS DUNCAN WHO WHUPPED SHAQ AND KOBE'S ***, WHUPPED LATRELL AND HOUSTON'S ***, WHUPPED PORTLAND'S *** in the playoffs. How does a shorten season have anything to do with it? What if the season was longer duncan woulda gotten tired or what?

And also, i'm sick and tired of people judging one's greatness with rings. if someone was the BEST PLAYER on a championship team, then you can use that argument. But you cant use it for pip, jordan was the MAIN reason for the ring, not pip.

and you say pip has 6 duncan has 1. so what??? DUNCAN LED HIS TEAM TO 1. pip led his team to 0. If you go by ammount of rings, then Steve Kerr is better then Clyde Drexler, Kerr has 4, Clyde only has 1.

I know pip was the second best player on the bulls had contributed alot, but he was REPLACIBLE, theo nly one not replacable on the bulls championship team was jordan himself.

So when you can't use "rings" as part of the argument because pip wanst the bset player on those teams, the next best thing is to compare individual skills and success.. Duncan has won more awards, has better stats and has proven to be more clutch IN PLAYOFFS THEN PIPPEN. Duncan hit shot after shot in game 5 of the finals to seal the victory.


<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Olajuwon's two rings and Duncan and Robinson's rings will always be tainted because they didnt beat the best to get it. Jordan retired on top both times, meaning the best was gone. So all you had to do was finish second best and you win a title. That is what Houston and SA did.

No doubt had Jordan not retired that the Bulls would have easily taken care of Hakeem and the Rockets, and had an even easier time against the Spurs. That's why their rings were tainted.

Rings are handy to measure one's worth but I agree it is not the be all and end all of a players ability. Barkley, Malone, Ewing, Stockton....4 of the greatest player ever but between them, dont have a ring. So your right in a way of saying that Pippen's 6 to TD's 1 is a little unfair on TD.

But at the end of the day Pippen will always be veiwed upon as the greater of the two players. Duncan has time to try and turn that around but IMO he wont. Pippen never had the chance to prove himself like Duncan has because he was always behind Jordan.

You say Duncan has a Finals MVP, a regular season MVP, etc etc. But if you replaced Pip with Duncan onto the Bulls in 1987 and let him team up with Jordan throughout the 90's....im sorry but TD wouldnt have seen any sliverware just like Pippen didnt. Because Jordan won everything. You cant fault Pippen, he was beaten to awards by the greatest.

Pippen easily deserves his spot in the top 50. If they were ranked, I bet he would come in around top 30, 25.

[jod23]

Re: if the NBA made a new top 50 list.. who would replace who?

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

how the hell can you say "duncan's ring" means nothing just becuase it was a lockout season and it was post jordan. So any season that jordan doesnt play in, the championship doesnt matter? And the season was shortened but playoffs was the same. It WAS DUNCAN WHO WHUPPED SHAQ AND KOBE'S ***, WHUPPED LATRELL AND HOUSTON'S ***, WHUPPED PORTLAND'S *** in the playoffs. How does a shorten season have anything to do with it? What if the season was longer duncan woulda gotten tired or what?

And also, i'm sick and tired of people judging one's greatness with rings. if someone was the BEST PLAYER on a championship team, then you can use that argument. But you cant use it for pip, jordan was the MAIN reason for the ring, not pip.

and you say pip has 6 duncan has 1. so what??? DUNCAN LED HIS TEAM TO 1. pip led his team to 0. If you go by ammount of rings, then Steve Kerr is better then Clyde Drexler, Kerr has 4, Clyde only has 1.

I know pip was the second best player on the bulls had contributed alot, but he was REPLACIBLE, theo nly one not replacable on the bulls championship team was jordan himself.

So when you can't use "rings" as part of the argument because pip wanst the bset player on those teams, the next best thing is to compare individual skills and success.. Duncan has won more awards, has better stats and has proven to be more clutch IN PLAYOFFS THEN PIPPEN. Duncan hit shot after shot in game 5 of the finals to seal the victory.


<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Olajuwon's two rings and Duncan and Robinson's rings will always be tainted because they didnt beat the best to get it. Jordan retired on top both times, meaning the best was gone. So all you had to do was finish second best and you win a title. That is what Houston and SA did.

No doubt had Jordan not retired that the Bulls would have easily taken care of Hakeem and the Rockets, and had an even easier time against the Spurs. That's why their rings were tainted.

Rings are handy to measure one's worth but I agree it is not the be all and end all of a players ability. Barkley, Malone, Ewing, Stockton....4 of the greatest player ever but between them, dont have a ring. So your right in a way of saying that Pippen's 6 to TD's 1 is a little unfair on TD.

But at the end of the day Pippen will always be veiwed upon as the greater of the two players. Duncan has time to try and turn that around but IMO he wont. Pippen never had the chance to prove himself like Duncan has because he was always behind Jordan.

You say Duncan has a Finals MVP, a regular season MVP, etc etc. But if you replaced Pip with Duncan onto the Bulls in 1987 and let him team up with Jordan throughout the 90's....im sorry but TD wouldnt have seen any sliverware just like Pippen didnt. Because Jordan won everything. You cant fault Pippen, he was beaten to awards by the greatest.

Pippen easily deserves his spot in the top 50. If they were ranked, I bet he would come in around top 30, 25.

[swigfall]

Re: if the NBA made a new top 50 list.. who would replace who?

All I have to say is Reggie Miller should of made that list in '97. He was in the league 10 years and already the NBA record holder for most 3pt shots made

[swigfall]

Re: if the NBA made a new top 50 list.. who would replace who?

All I have to say is Reggie Miller should of made that list in '97. He was in the league 10 years and already the NBA record holder for most 3pt shots made