ESPN Top 100 list

[ojandpizza]

I'm basing it more from what I've been able to see, which can be difficult considering most instances are highlights only, but deadly seems to be a strong term in this case. Especially when you're shooting 40% and it's taking 23 shots to get 25 points. Even if those years with Baltimore he was the best player alive that's still only 4 years of his career, and probably why basketball reference only gives him a 14% chance at hitting the HOF. By the same measure you're calling Monroe deadly you call anyone else that doesn't hit one of YOUR lists erratic..

It's really hard for me to back these claims "Defenses back in Monroe's days were much more physical than they are now and the players were more fundamentally sound with their defensive techniques" when it happens every 5 to 10 years. This era more so than that era, more so than that era, more so than that era.. Nothing I can find video wise supports this IMO. Especially the fundamentally sound part when I see videos like these https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RRii8d-jCMI. But I'm not really here to start up a big argument about that.

[AlexBrady]

Monroe's career field goal percentage is 46.4%. That is better than all time great shooters like Ray Allen and Klay Thompson. My old game charts consistently have Monroe shooting about 45% from 15 to 18 feet. That is outstanding and yes "deadly".

The fact is that it was tougher to penetrate to the basket under the rules in which Pearl played. Which isn't to say that old team defenses were necessarily 'better' than today's more exotic schemes.

You are correct in your theory that the NBA has taken measures throughout the years to reduce the physicality in the game.

Picking a game at random and castigating an entire generation of players is silly. That was the game that finally ended the Lakers 33 game win streak and they had little energy left due to the night after night pressure to win.

[ojandpizza]

Better by 46% compared to 45% isn't really saying much, also noted that 3 point shooting brings them down a hair, they both shoot better from 2 than he. It would be tough to gauge for considering how different their shots and shot distances would be. Seemingly players from that era found themselves pretty open on anything 15 feet and out. Like I said, not really that interested in arguing that other stuff for hours on here.

Curious, why haven't you posted your "charts" and whatever else here? Do you have a blog or detailed breakdown somewhere that includes all of that? Would be a good read.

[AlexBrady]

Quote: Originally Posted by ojandpizza

Better by 46% compared to 45% isn't really saying much, also noted that 3 point shooting brings them down a hair, they both shoot better from 2 than he. It would be tough to gauge for considering how different their shots and shot distances would be. Seemingly players from that era found themselves pretty open on anything 15 feet and out. Like I said, not really that interested in arguing that other stuff for hours on here. Curious, why haven't you posted your "charts" and whatever else here? Do you have a blog or detailed breakdown somewhere that includes all of that? Would be a good read.

For roughly the first five years of Monroe's career there was no pre-game shootaround so the players spent much of the first quarter trying to break a sweat and get dialed in. Shooting was less refined back then as well. Today teams are much more efficient in generating the shots that they want and the players are very skilled.

Thompson and Allen do not shoot better from 15-18 feet than Monroe who I had at about 45% on more than 80 views. Thompson and Allen are both at about 44% from that range which is still very good.

There isn't much demand for historical research to my knowledge. I have made calls to certain folks and there is little money to be made.

[Kashanova]

I've always said Kobe was vastly overrated and not a top 10 all-time player. People would say that makes me a *****, but it doesn't I'm glad this list agreed with me.

[AlexBrady]

Quote: Originally Posted by Kashanova

I've always said Kobe was vastly overrated and not a top 10 all-time player. People would say that makes me a *****, but it doesn't I'm glad this list agreed with me.

Points, wings, and bigs can't really be ranked together since the job descriptions are too different. Looking at the players ranked ahead of Kobe and who have similar on-court functions, I'm not sure I would rank Larry Bird and Magic Johnson ahead of Kobe. Bird couldn't guard anybody one on one and lacked the elite athleticism of Bryant. Magic lacked a reliable perimeter shot and was an awful defender.

Certainly, Kobe has many unlikable aspects about him but there is no doubting his talent, creativity, and competitive drive.

[Kashanova]

Quote: Originally Posted by AlexBrady

Points, wings, and bigs can't really be ranked together since the job descriptions are too different. Looking at the players ranked ahead of Kobe and who have similar on-court functions, I'm not sure I would rank Larry Bird and Magic Johnson ahead of Kobe. Bird couldn't guard anybody one on one and lacked the elite athleticism of Bryant. Magic lacked a reliable perimeter shot and was an awful defender. Certainly, Kobe has many unlikable aspects about him but there is no doubting his talent, creativity, and competitive drive.

I disagree, this isn't like comparing Pitchers to Batters, in basketball. Everyone on the court has an opportunity to score, rebound, pass, and defend. Magic and Bird impacted the game in ways, Kobe could only wish he could. For one, these guys dominated a decade. Winning MVPs, and Finals MVPs, winning rings. Kobe didn't dominate a decade, IMO, he's not even the best in his generation. He has one MVP in 20 years, only won two FMVPs, and has failed to show in numerous Game 7s, where those two constantly shined. The mastery that both players had on the court definitely outshines whatever limitations they might have had.

[AlexBrady]

Comparing non-centers to centers is similar to your baseball analogy. True while basketball players need to have a basic mastery over every skill the precise job requirements of the positions differ greatly.

Point guards are not expected to be difference-making rebounders and as such are required to pull down one rebound for every 10 minutes of playing time. Centers are supposed to grab one rebound for every 3 minutes of action.

Then consider points are required to know the duties of all of their teammates at any time. They must also know who all of their opponents of the moment are and who they are matched up against, the score, and the clocks. Compare that to a center who typically only has a vague notion of who the opponent's guards are. All points need a superb handle while that is an afterthought for virtually every center.

In theory, a point guard playing 48 minutes of a ballgame will run about 5.2 miles covering the distance between both foul lines. Centers and forwards though are stationed closer to the basket and have to run baseline to baseline which will cover about 6.8 miles. Then consider how much more weight these bigs need to haul up and down.

Certainly, I would say that Kobe Bryant held the title of best non-big in the NBA (Shaquille O'Neal and Tim Duncan had more influence at different points in time) from the 99-00 season to the middle of the 11-12 season when LeBron likely overtook him for that distinction.