Controversy??...My Lists and Some Explainatins For...

[TajDeni]

1st off b4 i get into what ima be typing 2day, let me take the time to say congraduation to all the Miami Heat fans and to LBJ. He finally did it, I said b4 these playoffs started to friends of mines, that if LBJ was to win he would have to come face to face with all his demons along the way. And he did. He faced them all standing on 2 feet like a champion should and i tip my hat to him.

Just more on LBJ

Spoiler

Atleast 4 all of next season and until someone detrones him, he is the current KING. but thats all it is, the storylines should be about all that he has endured to get to this point in his career; a celebration of his winning a championship this yr, and the challenges facing him going forward to defend his crown in pursuit of ring #2. anything 2 far beyond that is imo giving him stripes on his uniform b4 he's actually put in the work to earn them. But 4 now, All Hail!

With that said, inspired by LBJ's 1st title and the media's stupidity of trying to erase guys entire career works just because LBJ got his 1st ive decided to do my own list of the all-time greats. Ima do it prolly alittle different than you think but ill get into that shortly.

* My list is going to be split into 2 groups (perimeter and bigs) i honestly dont see how you can compare what perimeter players do to what the bigs do, completely different skill-sets need to be successful.

The Perimeter (PG,SG,SF):

The Greatest of All Time - (Skills + Resume)
- Michael Jordan

Spoiler

: skills/resume/desire/mental fortituted/work ethic, when ya add it all up the final tally is going to result at one final conclusion, that he's just the greatest perimeter player so far

The Best Player of All Time - (Most Skills, Honed Craftmanship)
- Kobe Bryant

Spoiler

: some may have a have a tough time with this but imo noone ever had a more complete game than Kobe Bryant. In his prime he had absolutely no part of his game that could be considered a weakness. obviously there are players who have this or that skill to a greater degree than Kobe; but it is my honest belief that there has never been a player who total skillset was on par with Kobe's. He is the most fundamently sound player ever imo.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_WNTx3gG_s

: in reality i consider MJ and Kobe 2 different sides of the same coin, I consider Kobe MJ with more fanciness to his game and thus less effecient. Tho he did jacked up 1000+ more 3s and is now playing far later into the twilight of his career. Like I said I consider Kobe more skilled and I consider MJ the historically greater player to this point in time. Maybe itll be that way 4ever. But I personally only recognise MJ as a "greater" perimeter player than Kobe.

The Most Talented Player of All Time - (God Given Raw Talent)
- Lebron James

Spoiler

: raw talent is not to be confused with skills or greatness. to me raw talent is just from the 1st day of picking up the basketball, without any dedication to ones craft, having attributes and talents noone else possess. If you kept everything about their games exactly the same and you put MJs and Kobe's skillset into LBJs body, I believe they are superior to him. And vice versa I dont believe he would be as good as them in their bodies. But as life is about reality and not about what ifs the facts remain that Lebron James is the most talented player there ever has been. All that remains now is to see how far will he go with those talents bestowed upon him. to be continued...

Best Franchise Player of All Time (In an All Time Fantasy Draft the #1 Picks is..)
- Magic Johnson

Spoiler

: to me the best franchise player does not have to be the greatest, skilled or most talented. being the best franchise player is who is the best player to build a team/organization around. who is the best leader of men, has the highest basketball IQ and such. From day 1 of Magic's career in college to day 1 of his career in the NBA, Magic already knew what it took to be a champion. To me, in a all time fantasy draft he is my #1 perimeter player id take to start a franchise with. In this regard, to me, he is 2nd to none.

The Bigs: (PF, C)

The Greatest of All Time - (Skills + Resume)
- Kareem Abdul Jabbar

Spoiler

: the scoring, the hook shot, the blocks, the rebounds, the championships, the longevity; again when you add it all up the only logical conclusion is The Capt.

The Best Player of All Time - (Most Skills, Honed Craftmanship)
- Hakeem Olajuwon

Spoiler

" considered giving Tim Duncan the nod here, but in the end for the same reason i have Kobe here above, I just simply think that Hakeem was the most skilled big that ever played. For a Big his skillset is imo unrivaled. Again in his prime he had absolutely no weakness in his game anywhere.

The Most Talented Player of All Time - (God Given Raw Talent)
- Shaquille O'Neil

Spoiler

: again i gave consideration to Wilt here, but in the end, i feel that Wilt should have won more than 2 championships. For his time, for his size, and for his skill level relative to everyone else around him, i just dont think he was killa enough for me, as evident by losing to Willis Reed. And when he played for the Lakers he had more than enough talent around him to win more than 1 ring. Just my take, so i went with Shaq. tho like Wilt I feel that Shaq is another example of some wasted potential, because it is widely known that Shaq's work ethic was not the greatest or on par with his talent level. Again think what Randy Moss wouldve been with a superior work ethic to match. Its literally unimaginable.

Best Franchise Player of All Time (In an All Time Fantasy Draft the #1 Picks is..)
- Bill Russell

Spoiler

: Quite simply the greatest champion ever! Along with Magic imo in an all time fantasy draft just the ultimate player to build a franchise around if you were to start with a big. The defense, the rebounding, the high IQ, the leadership, and he won as a coach (something very few great players can do). Im not sure who to take 1st ,him or Magic. But imo they are the #1 and #2 picks to build a team around.

-- so these are my breakdowns of the greatest players of all time across the 4 categories I think players can be divided into as totality groupings, meaning not who is the best defender, or 3pts shooter etc.

My All Time Squad
(Some People on My List were not posted above and not everyone above is guaranteed to be on teh squad)


Starters:

Spoiler

PG: Magic Johnson
SG: Michael Jordan
(personally id move MJ to SF and put KB at 2, but 4 team balance purposes i wont)
SF: Lebron James*
(i personally think Kobe belongs at the SG and MJ at the SF, MJ was 6'6" 220, he could handle it, but because of team functionality and realistic coaching balance purposes he belongs here imo )
PF: Bill Russell
C: Kareem Abdul Jabbar

Bench:

Spoiler

PG: Oscar Robinson
SG: Kobe Bryant* (starter, but is gettin the Manu coaching treatment)
(imo he belongs in the starting lineup because he is a top 3 perimeter player of all time, so he should occupy 1 of those slots, but 4 team balance he's getting the Manu treatment in this scenario.
SF: Larry Bird
PF: Tim Duncan
C: Hakeem Olajuwon

Extra 2:

Spoiler

Shaquille O'Neal - C
(taking Shaq over Wilt)
Jerry West - G
(tho id consider a guards with some pg skills)

[AlexBrady]

Re: Controversy??...My Lists and Some Explainatins For...

Looks like you put a lot of thought into that. I'll share my thoughts on some of your points.

Kobe does indeed have good fundamentals, but he can't compare to Oscar Robertson, the ultimate fundamentalist. You're right for not directly comparing perimeter players to pivot men. Totally different responsibilities.

Wilt Chamberlain did not have a cutthroat mentality like Russell or Jabbar. But in my mind, he did prove he was a winner in 72 by gladly accepting being a role player (defending, screening, rebounding). And the crop of big men was far superior then compared to any point in time after. Wilt variously faced Bill Russell, Nate Thurmond, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Willis Reed, Bob Lanier, Elmore Smith, Dave Cowens, Zelmo Beaty, Wes Unseld, Clifford Ray, Walter Dukes, and Darrall Imhoff.

Bill Russell would be my pick for starting a ballclub. He could run like the wind and hold his ground until the last second before blocking or harassing shots. Unlike today's macho men, Russell actually kept the ball in play and his teammates were off to the races. He was the greatest board man of all time, at least a 5 space rebounder. And he specalized in throwing post rebound outlet passes. He is the greatest champion ever, but I get annoyed when people just say that and gloss over his specific skill set.

For me, LeBron's erratic perimeter shooting and his limited effectiveness without the ball keeps him out of the inner circle of elites (and therefore off an all time team like this). I would start Jerry West at shooting guard and move Michael Jordan to small forward.

Off the bench, you have Oscar Robertson and Kobe Bryant. Both needed ample ball time to be most effective, so one would need to go. Kobe would be gone, move Oscar to shooting guard, and bring in a facilitating point guard like John Stockton or Lenny Wilkens. With a dreadnaught scoring center, its smart to have an outside shooting specialist at power forward. Dave DeBusschere would be a smart pick and either Duncan or Olajuwon would be out.

A word on Gary Payton. He needed full time posession of the ball to be effective and he was a drive and dish passer. Every pass he made was meant to be an assist, and that just isn't how you play five man ball. Moreover, his reckless gambles were damaging and got his teammates into foul trouble.

[TajDeni]

Re: Controversy??...My Lists and Some Explainatins For...

thanks 4 the response, i will look up some of the names you mention to see what type of info i can gather on them.

[Rule of Two]

Re: Controversy??...My Lists and Some Explainatins For...

The only two players who could play against Wilt physically during his time in the NBA were Russell and Abdul-Jabbar. Even then they were a little too thin to match up with him strength-wise. The man never had a league full of athletes to contend against. I also don't think you can say the league was as fundamentally sound as it was in the 1980s to present day. There would be no 100 point game or laughably high averages if he played during the 80s, 90s, 00s, or 10s.

Wilt would probably win my award for greatest genetic freak of his time. The shoulders on a man his height were incredile. You could tell he had an easy time moving all of those smaller bodies around. Almost cartoonish to watch.

As every sport grows in popularity so does the pool of talent it has to draw from. This is why I think a lot of the greats from the 70s on back are overrated and remembered to be better than they actually were. Especially when you take into consideration the state of the NBA then.

For example: I love my old Ford Mustang but today's versions are far superior to my old gal even if I have fond memories of it.

Feel free to disagree and call me a fool. I know a lot of people don't like my opinion on this.

[AlexBrady]

Re: Controversy??...My Lists and Some Explainatins For...

The only two players who could play against Wilt physically during his time in the NBA were Russell and Abdul-Jabbar. Even then they were a little too thin to match up with him strength-wise. The man never had a league full of athletes to contend against. I also don't think you can say the league was as fundamentally sound as it was in the 1980s to present day. There would be no 100 point game or laughably high averages if he played during the 80s, 90s, 00s, or 10s.

Wilt would probably win my award for greatest genetic freak of his time. The shoulders on a man his height were incredile. You could tell he had an easy time moving all of those smaller bodies around. Almost cartoonish to watch.

As every sport grows in popularity so does the pool of talent it has to draw from. This is why I think a lot of the greats from the 70s on back are overrated and remembered to be better than they actually were. Especially when you take into consideration the state of the NBA then.

For example: I love my old Ford Mustang but today's versions are far superior to my old gal even if I have fond memories of it.

Feel free to disagree and call me a fool. I know a lot of people don't like my opinion on this.

Wrong. There were plenty of leviathans to match up against Wilt. For example:

Bob Lanier 6'11, 260
Willis Reed 6'10, 250
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar 7'2, 240
Bill Russell 6'10, 225
Nate Thurmond 6'11, 250
Dave Cowens 6'9, 245
Wes Unseld 6'7, 255
Walter Dukes 7'0, 230
Elmore Smith 7'0, 250
Zelmo Beaty 6'9, 230
Clifford Ray 6'9, 230

Actually, the league was more fundamentally sound during Wilt's heyday because everyone was forced to play out the full four years of college. This is where guys mastered how to cut, screen, box out, and generally learn how to play without the ball. Then Spencer Haywood declared himself a "hardship" case in 69 and guys started coming into the league with gaping holes in their game. Kevin Garnett came out early more recently and the league was dumbed down even further.

Back then, you couldn't double team pivot men, or play zone, or jam the lane. There was more time for post men to just mess around and do what they wanted. I agree that Wilt wouldn't have averaged 50 ppg in todays game, simply because he would be double teamed much more. But he would average 18-20 rebounds, because he was so strong and quick. The shameful crop of current big men would also help him out.

On the contrary, the talent pool in todays game is incredibly diluted and there are a number of players who shouldn't even be playing, let alone starting. For sure, some of the guys who played in the 70s on back were overrated, but more guys played the total game back then (meaning they excelled without the ball).

Its foolish at best and dangerous at worst to compare the human spirit to automobiles.

[TajDeni]

Re: Controversy??...My Lists and Some Explainatins For...

1 star and only 3 ppl gave their opinions, if ya disagree with anything being said all ya gotta do is state your case. seems alil fanboyish.

also to AB, the team i made up was based around who i think are the best players, i wasnt necessarily trying to build the very best team functionally.

also i think that Kobe could play more off the ball if he had to, like i mentioned he's fundamentally sound in all phases of the game, so he could adjust. his entire career he's been the primary ballhandler and playmaker for the lakers in addition to being aggresive scorer.

if you go back to the '09 WCFs against S.A. up until the very end he did alot of damage moving without the ball and scoring on catch and shoots. so i dont see the need to remove him because he had the skillset to fall back on should he choose to accept that roll. obviously its not at the Reggie Miller or Ray Allen, but he can score moving without the ball. in fact i believe had the CP3 deal not fallen through the bball community wouldve seen more of that this yr.

its cool if you'd take him off, but based on your reasoning for why, ima still keep him

-------

i agree with your premise about LBJ, but i was more of looking at him as an jack of all trades type of player, the perfect link between the bigs and the guards.

[wwharton]

Re: Controversy??...My Lists and Some Explainatins For...

1 star and only 3 ppl gave their opinions, if ya disagree with anything being said all ya gotta do is state your case. seems alil fanboyish.

Or people just don't like the thread and are choosing to not comment rather than troll.

[AlexBrady]

Re: Controversy??...My Lists and Some Explainatins For...

1 star and only 3 ppl gave their opinions, if ya disagree with anything being said all ya gotta do is state your case. seems alil fanboyish.

also to AB, the team i made up was based around who i think are the best players, i wasnt necessarily trying to build the very best team functionally.

also i think that Kobe could play more off the ball if he had to, like i mentioned he's fundamentally sound in all phases of the game, so he could adjust. his entire career he's been the primary ballhandler and playmaker for the lakers in addition to being aggresive scorer.

if you go back to the '09 WCFs against S.A. up until the very end he did alot of damage moving without the ball and scoring on catch and shoots. so i dont see the need to remove him because he had the skillset to fall back on should he choose to accept that roll. obviously its not at the Reggie Miller or Ray Allen, but he can score moving without the ball. in fact i believe had the CP3 deal not fallen through the bball community wouldve seen more of that this yr.

its cool if you'd take him off, but based on your reasoning for why, ima still keep him

-------

i agree with your premise about LBJ, but i was more of looking at him as an jack of all trades type of player, the perfect link between the bigs and the guards.

Thats fine that you chose the best players, I was more focused on complementary skills. Kobe has good fundamentals in areas like footwork, pulling up with balance, set up passes, ect. One fundamentally unsound thing about his game though..... is his off the ball defense. He tends to drift and lean towards the ball, and a snappy reverse pass leads to his man pumping up an uncontested jumper.

Kobe's moving without the ball has been a sometimes thing. He usually wants to start his offense from a stop. Phil Jackson convinced Kobe to believe in the totality of the game though, so Kobe was indeed devestating during the times he did go through with the replacement cuts to the weak side. Would have saved himself alot of punishment if he was more willing to do it earlier in his career.

I highly doubt that the bball community would have seen Kobe moving without the ball if Chris Paul had come aboard. Mike Brown's offensive designs are sloppy and feature isolations and screen/rolls. He never gets his star player catching the ball on the move. Its give the ball to Kobe or LeBron and get out of the way. Count me as one who thought that Chris Paul and Kobe playing together would not have worked.

[TajDeni]

Re: Controversy??...My Lists and Some Explainatins For...

Or people just don't like the thread and are choosing to not comment rather than troll.

fair enough

[BlakkMajik3000]

Re: Controversy??...My Lists and Some Explainatins For...

Shaq = Wasted Potential? Surely you jest.

Shaq was as dominant as expected during his career. I'm not quite sure what was "wasted".

Not sure what else you expected him to accomplish. His stats/awards/titles speak for themselves, and he's an automatic first-ballot HOF player. The centers Shaq played against were no slouches either, which makes his achievements all the more impressive.

[ehh]

Re: Controversy??...My Lists and Some Explainatins For...

Wasted potential is harsh but there's no doubt in my mind that Shaq could have given us more and been more dominant.

His teams were swept out of the playoffs a whopping five times and he didn't win anything until all the great centers of the 80's/90's retired or were out of the league (and MJ too). As dominant as he was offensively against those centers he was a sieve on the other end of the floor, he couldn't check Hakeem, Ewing, Robinson, etc. For a man with his physical gifts he was an underachiever defensively, partially thanks to his weight gain after arriving in LA.

I can't think of a much worse era of the NBA post-merger than the dawn of the new millennium and that's when Shaq won his titles. The league was littered with one-dimensional "stars" who could fill it up as volume scorers and with crazy highlights but none of them ever won a thing. Watching that popular YouTube video on the NBA circa 2000-2004 is comical. McGrady, AI, Vince, Steve Francis, etc. It's a shame a generation of NBA fans was first introduced to the league with that crop of players. It was a three team league (LA, SA, Sac) and there was no center even remotely close to as talented as Shaq in the league outside of Yao. And of course he played with the three best post-MJ perimeter players too, that doesn't hurt.

Shaq is definitely a legend of the game but it's not that difficult to find things to be critical of in his career.

[DukeC]

Re: Controversy??...My Lists and Some Explainatins For...

Wasted potential is harsh but there's no doubt in my mind that Shaq could have given us more and been more dominant.

His teams were swept out of the playoffs a whopping five times and he didn't win anything until all the great centers of the 80's/90's retired or were out of the league (and MJ too). As dominant as he was offensively against those centers he was a sieve on the other end of the floor, he couldn't check Hakeem, Ewing, Robinson, etc. For a man with his physical gifts he was an underachiever defensively, partially thanks to his weight gain after arriving in LA.

I can't think of a much worse era of the NBA post-merger than the dawn of the new millennium and that's when Shaq won his titles. The league was littered with one-dimensional "stars" who could fill it up as volume scorers and with crazy highlights but none of them ever won a thing. Watching that popular YouTube video on the NBA circa 2000-2004 is comical. McGrady, AI, Vince, Steve Francis, etc. It's a shame a generation of NBA fans was first introduced to the league with that crop of players. It was a three team league (LA, SA, Sac) and there was no center even remotely close to as talented as Shaq in the league outside of Yao. And of course he played with the three best post-MJ perimeter players too, that doesn't hurt.

Shaq is definitely a legend of the game but it's not that difficult to find things to be critical of in his career.

Shaq = Randy Moss

I think that's a fair and accurate comparison.

Both are automatic HOF's. Everyone feels they could have did more though.

[TajDeni]

Re: Controversy??...My Lists and Some Explainatins For...

Shaq = Wasted Potential? Surely you jest.

Shaq was as dominant as expected during his career. I'm not quite sure what was "wasted".

Not sure what else you expected him to accomplish. His stats/awards/titles speak for themselves, and he's an automatic first-ballot HOF player. The centers Shaq played against were no slouches either, which makes his achievements all the more impressive.

i am not trying to say that Shaq was a bust or that he didnt have a HOF career, but i do think it very much common knowledge that Shaq did not have a HOF work ethic. Put it to you another way, Shaq is what Randy Moss was to the NFL.

I do think he could be considered as not living up to his full potential or even that he cheated the game, because at times he went about things the lazy way. Shaq did not come into every season of his career in shape, 4 what the reasons sometimes he seemed to take the approach that he would play his way into shape.

In the end it was a major contributing factor on why Kobe and Shaq couldnt coexist 2gether, atleast from Kobe's point of view. Kobe understood Shaq's dominance and greatness, but he didnt respect Shaq's work ethic. say what you want about the dynamics of the Kobe/Shaq relationship, but ppl with elite work ethics find it hard to be around folks who dont.

It also was a major factor into why in the end his relationship with Wade declined. with Wade going as far as calling Shaq out for milking injuries.

so yes just like Randy Moss, i think that Shaq did waste some of his potential and cheated the game abit, not that he is himself wasted potential. hope this clears up what i meant.

[Rule of Two]

Re: Controversy??...My Lists and Some Explainatins For...

Wrong. There were plenty of leviathans to match up against Wilt. For example:

Bob Lanier 6'11, 260
Willis Reed 6'10, 250
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar 7'2, 240
Bill Russell 6'10, 225
Nate Thurmond 6'11, 250
Dave Cowens 6'9, 245
Wes Unseld 6'7, 255
Walter Dukes 7'0, 230
Elmore Smith 7'0, 250
Zelmo Beaty 6'9, 230
Clifford Ray 6'9, 230

Actually, the league was more fundamentally sound during Wilt's heyday because everyone was forced to play out the full four years of college. This is where guys mastered how to cut, screen, box out, and generally learn how to play without the ball. Then Spencer Haywood declared himself a "hardship" case in 69 and guys started coming into the league with gaping holes in their game. Kevin Garnett came out early more recently and the league was dumbed down even further.

Back then, you couldn't double team pivot men, or play zone, or jam the lane. There was more time for post men to just mess around and do what they wanted. I agree that Wilt wouldn't have averaged 50 ppg in todays game, simply because he would be double teamed much more. But he would average 18-20 rebounds, because he was so strong and quick. The shameful crop of current big men would also help him out.

On the contrary, the talent pool in todays game is incredibly diluted and there are a number of players who shouldn't even be playing, let alone starting. For sure, some of the guys who played in the 70s on back were overrated, but more guys played the total game back then (meaning they excelled without the ball).

Its foolish at best and dangerous at worst to compare the human spirit to automobiles.

I was comparing human memory and tendency to automobiles. I said nothing about human spirit. Freaking weirdo.

You named 3 Centers at most who were worth naming. Doesn't disprove what I said in the least bit. Everyone remembers stuff they're fond of as better than it actually was. That's fact.

[Rule of Two]

Re: Controversy??...My Lists and Some Explainatins For...

My "All-Time" team would look something like this...

PG. Magic Johnson/Oscar Robertson/Jerry West(If you're one of those people who don't consider Jerry a true PG I'd replace him with Bob Cousy)
SG. Michael Jordan/Kobe Bryant/Dwyane Wade
SF. Larry Bird/LeBron James/James Worthy
PF. Tim Duncan/Elgin Baylor/Charles Barkley or Karl Malone
C. Bill Russell/Hakeen Olajuwon/Wilt Chamberlain

There are so many more I'd like to add but if I was forced to choose two - three men at each position this is what I'd go with.