Deal with it... Kobe Bryant is a top 10 player of all time
The storyline that began about 5 milliseconds after the Lakers/Magic series concluded in five games was Kobe's place in history. Kobe Bryant now has a championship sans Shaquille O'Neal. He's now a 4-time NBA champion (something even Larry Bird cannot claim). In the last 2 years, Kobe has been named MVP, won a gold freakin' medal, and now the Larry O'Brien trophy - bookended with a Finals MVP award.
Of course, Kobe Bryant is the most polarizing athlete of our time. The mere mention of his name is the spark to an inevitable argument.
Today's argument? Is Kobe Bryant a top-10 player in the history of basketball?
Not that my opinion would surprise anyone here, but the answer is YES. Furthermore, Kobe was already a top-10 player long before the 2009 season. Winning the fourth championship is nice and all... it even removes a few figurative monkeys from his back. But Kobe's legacy was secured a long time ago. He has been in the NBA for 13 years now, and has been an elite player for more than a decade. Not even Michael Jordan can make that claim given that he burned out and had to take a two year gambling baseball sabbatical.
Given the nature of the sports media these days, it's sad to think that Kobe Bryant will not truly be appreciated until after he retires. He's despised by so many for having the temerity to be nearly as good as Michael Jordan. There's no doubt Kobe copied not only his game, but many of his mannerisms from Jordan. Then again, if you're going to plagiarize, you might as well steal from the best. (The ironic part of all of this is that Jordan was viewed by the public just like Kobe was until 1993 when he first retired. Don't forget that Jordan was originally deemed a selfish scorer who did not get along with teammates and was often moody. Simply put, Jordan was an asshole... and we only appreciated him when he wasn't around anymore. The same will be said of Kobe.)
Of course, since this is a sports blog and it's still part of the Internet, this debate is hollow without a list of some sort. Which means this is all a long-winded setup for me to share my Top 10 All-Time Basketball Players (with a heavy emphasis on NBA contributions):
1. Michael Jordan. There's a reason Kobe wants to be like him. No shame in that. Jordan was the Man.
2. Wilt Chamberlain. The greatest physical specimen the league had ever seen until Shaquille O'Neal came along. Unlike the Fat Ass, however, Wilt actually worked on his game and did not rely solely on his god-given talent. The most amazing statistic of all time is that Wilt once played EVERY minute of EVERY game in one season. I'd like to see Shaquille O'Neal even attempt to play 48 minutes in back-to-back games without having a heart attack.
3. Magic Johnson. For ten years, Magic was the king of the NBA. Even Jordan took a backseat to Magic until that pesky HIV virus found its way into Earvin's bloodstream. I still feel cheated that we did not get another five years of a healthy Magic Johnson running the point. He was that good.
4. Kareem Abdul Jabbar. As Simmons likes to say, Kareem was a ninny. He was. But he is also the NBA's all-time scoring leader, with more MVP awards than anyone in history (including that Jordan guy). Magic won all of his rings with Kareem... they boosted each other's games in ways Shaq and Kobe could only have dreamed of.
5. Tim Duncan. Simply put - the greatest power forward of all-time. And there really isn't a legit competitor to this title. Anyone who even mentions "Karl Malone" gets punched in the nuts for being dumb. Timmy has 3.5 rings (the 1999 season does not count), multiple MVP awards and if you look at Duncan's 2003 supporting cast, you'd be amazed how that team won the championship that year.
6. Kobe Bryant. Yes, I'm putting him ahead of Larry Bird. Kobe was a better scorer and a better defender than Larry Bird. Bryant -- like Jordan -- can lock down most any opponent on the defensive end while still being the primary option on the offensive end. 4 rings, including three while carrying the Fat Ass on his back. One MVP award even though the media does not like him that much. Just look at the 2008 U.S. Men's Olympic Team... when the personalities of LeBron and Dwyane Wade defer to Kobe, that speaks volumes.
7. Larry Bird. The purest shooter the NBA has ever seen. Could also rebound in traffic and had court vision that may have only been matched by Magic Johnson. Unfortunately, Bird's back gave out too early and his peak years were reduced from what they could have been. Imagine if Bird had a healthy back and Magic decided to wrap it up during orgys. The early 1990s of the NBA could have been even greater (and MJ might have less rings).
8. Hakeem Olajuwon. Yes, you are reading that right. Hakeem belongs on this list ahead of Shaquille. And don't give me that crap about "Olajuwon won his rings only because Jordan was not there." The Rockets of the early 1990s ownedthe Jordan-era Bulls. If Kenny Smith had made a freakin' jump shot against Seattle in 1993, the Finals would have been Jordan v. Hakeem. And Hakeem would have won. Olajuwon is amazingly underrated by this point. He redefined how to play the center position and you will never see another player like him.
9. Jerry West. On the list of "best shooting guards" West was number one until Jordan and Kobe came along. The Logo unfortunately had to play against the Celtics in an era when the Celtics stockpiled all of the talent in a 10-12 team league and only won one championship ring. Do not let that detract from how amazing Jerry West was. Just take a look at his statistics. They are ridiculous.
10. Oscar Robertson. He's low on this list simply because many of his statistics are improperly inflated given the era he was in. The triple double for a whole season is nice, but most teams scored in the 120s and 130s in that era. Which allows for lots of points, rebounds and assists as a byproduct. Also, the Big O is only temporarily holding this spot in line for a few more years until LeBron's stats become truly insane and historic.
honorable mention
Bob Cousy, John Havlicek, Robert Horry, John Stockton, Charles Barkley, Elgin Baylor, Dr. J and the Fat Ass.
The mere fact that Shaquille O'Neal isn't the greatest player in the history of the NBA is a disappointment. The fact that he's not even in the top 10 all-time is a travesty. And a waste of talent. It's downright shameful. Kobe Bryant, on the other hand, has maximized every bit of athletic ability and basketball IQ. It's what puts him among the greatest of the great. When his career is over, Kobe Bryant might be in the top 3. And people will still hate him. It's unfortunate.

FOLLOW UP: I know the real reaction is "Where is Bill Russell?" or "Where is Player X?". Let's start with Bill Russell. Yeah, I know he won 11 rings. So the F what. He won rings in an era when there were only 8 teams in the entire NBA. 8 teams. And he had 5 other hall of famers on his team. If he won less than 11 rings, Bill Russell should have been deemed a failure! Furthermore, we rip on so many players for not playing defense... for not playing on both sides of the court. Meanwhile, there's Russell, who in an era when teams scored more points than ever before somehow only managed to average 15.1 points per game for his career. And while 15.1 points a game is nothing to scoff at, it *is* enough to keep him out of the top 10. Especially if you adjust for the era he was in.
This might be another topic for another time, but Bill Russell might be the most overrated player of all time. I'm sure Scottie Pippen will be happy to know that I no longer think that title belongs to him.
0 recs |
60 comments
|
Comments
Another list
A couple weeks ago, SLAM magazine did their top 50, before Kobe won the last title. Here is their top 13…
1. Michael Jordan
2. Wilt Chamberlain
3. Bill Russell
4. Shaquille O’Neal
5. Oscar Robertson
6. Magic Johnson
7. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
8. Tim Duncan
9. Larry Bird
10. Jerry West
11. Elgin Baylor
12. Kobe Bryant
13. Hakeem Olajuwon
Check out nickandroll.blogspot.com
by n1ck34 on Jun 16, 2009 1:44 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
hahaha
Russell and the Fat Ass ahead of Magic and Kareem? That’s funny.
by grungedave on Jun 16, 2009 1:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
grungedave...
you are truly an idiot. no russell in the top 10 or honorable mention!!?? the guy who has the finals mvp named after him and no honorable mention? good luck getting any credibility. apparently 5 nba mvp’s mean nothing to you.
you have no problem placing wilt and jerry west on your list. maybe you need to do some research.
kobe at 6 and the big o at 10!!??
why are you riding kobe’s nuts? kobe better buy pau and ariza a house ‘cause there ain’t no way he even sniffs the finals without them, but all the tabloids are talking about kobe this and kobe that. hell i would even argue that pau was the mvp of the lakers team and more valuable than kobe.
this list means nothing. you obviously know nothing about basketball.
by P_Dizzle on Jun 16, 2009 2:39 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
in contrast
Cy Young has the “best pitcher award” named after him, but no one in their right mind would put him in the top 10 pitchers of all time because they know his stats are inflated due to the era he played in.
by grungedave on Jun 16, 2009 3:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
and you think hakeem could've won alone?
"One person working diligently alone can do wonders, but many people working harmoniously together can accomplish worlds."-Brandon Boyd"
by kobethebasketballmessiah on Jun 19, 2009 5:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
We get it
You have a hard-on for Kobe.
This is a Houston Rockets blog, is it not?
by DJKHawk on Jun 16, 2009 2:44 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
The guy above me is just on a rant...
but Russell deserves some mention…it may have been a different era, but his numbers are inconceivable…
11 rings in 13 seasons
22.5 rebounds per game
5 MVP’s
Check out nickandroll.blogspot.com
by n1ck34 on Jun 16, 2009 2:44 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
5 MVPs sure...
But only 100 total players in the league.
And don’t even try to compare NBA players of the 50s and 60s to current players. The mere fact that it was possible to get 22.5 rebounds a game and not lead the league is a joke.
by grungedave on Jun 16, 2009 3:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
whatever dave
it’s not like I am a Celtic’s fan…just the numbers are pretty impressive. So finishing in the top 3 of MVP voting now would be like winning the MVP back then. If a player does that now, it is damn impressive. Why…why do you hate Bill Russell so much?
Check out nickandroll.blogspot.com
by n1ck34 on Jun 16, 2009 8:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
There is a HUGE differnce between hating Russell and saying he is overrated
He IS overrated, extremely so at that. The guy was 6’8 and had no offensive game. He got by on athleticism and heart. I think that makes him a great player and celebrate him as such. But to ever think that he’s better than Wilt, Kareem, Dream or Shaq is just hilarious to me.
The guy is Marcus Camby in today’s NBA, period
www.TheDreamShake.com Co-Founder and Writer
by UofTOrange on Jun 17, 2009 9:40 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why do you say he has no offensive game????
Why do you keep saying that? Stop looking at his averages. His whole damn team averaged very similar points meaning that they shared the ball. No team in todays era, or shit, even that era have really done that. Would Wilt have averaged similar points if he played on the Celtics? It’s very plausible to say yes he would have. Russell could score when he needed too. He preferred to get his teammates involved. Very unselfish to say the least.
Do I think he’s better then Wilt, Kareem, or Dream? No. Shaq? Tossup.
The list is not bad. However, to not give Russell an honorable mention is ludacris. Basketball blashphemy.
by erod on Jun 17, 2009 11:38 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i'll say this much
kobe did NOT carry the lakers teams of the early 2000s. Those teams actually used the triangle offense, and played more of an inside-out style. Read Phil Jackson’s book. Shaq was the unquestioned focus of their offense, which naturally (and possibly justifiably) didn’t leave kobe too happy. Those were the days when Shaq was capable of putting up a 40/20 in the playoffs.
by whodat21 on Jun 16, 2009 2:44 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
and Michael Jordan didn't carry the bulls 6 times..
"One person working diligently alone can do wonders, but many people working harmoniously together can accomplish worlds."-Brandon Boyd"
by kobethebasketballmessiah on Jun 19, 2009 5:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
This post is inappropriate
Shouldn’t people expect Kobe-crush articles on Silver Screen and Roll or something? This is ridiculous. Sports blogs ought to be for new information, or a twist on traditional ways of thinking, not for regurgitated, tired arguments that blare from ESPN everyday. Jeez. We’ve heard nothing but Kobe vs. Lebron all season AND he punched a Rocket player in the throat. I don’t like him. Don’t want to talk about him. Talk about the Rockets, people would appreciate it.
by scalito on Jun 16, 2009 3:04 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
again, it is the offseason. I will write about whatever I want.
And I did discuss the Rockets… or did you not see Hakeem at #8?
by grungedave on Jun 16, 2009 3:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
also
you stated: “Sports blogs ought to be for new information, or a twist on traditional ways of thinking, not for regurgitated, tired arguments that blare from ESPN everyday.”
If that were the case, Bill Russell and the Fat Ass would be in my top 10 with no questions asked. So, me putting Kobe there instead of Shaq and informing all of you that Russell is overrated…… well that’s neither regurgitated, tired nor something ESPN would dare say.
by grungedave on Jun 16, 2009 3:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
he punched a Rocket player in the throat. I don’t like him. Don’t want to talk about him. Talk about the Rockets, people would appreciate it.--replays would help you out
"One person working diligently alone can do wonders, but many people working harmoniously together can accomplish worlds."-Brandon Boyd"
by kobethebasketballmessiah on Jun 19, 2009 5:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree with Dave
Russell is horrendously overrated. HORRENDOUSLY. He was 6’8 and played center. Hellaciously athletic, but basically worthless on offense. Dennis Rodman is not a top 10 player either, but was Russell in a different era.
www.TheDreamShake.com Co-Founder and Writer
by UofTOrange on Jun 16, 2009 3:21 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
And the rings argument is tired
No salary cap, and he played with FIVE hall of famers. He had a guy on the bench that’s in the HOF for goodness sake.
www.TheDreamShake.com Co-Founder and Writer
by UofTOrange on Jun 16, 2009 3:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You act like he was scrub who couldn’t score. And don’t ever compare Dennis Rodman to Bill Russell.
by erod on Jun 16, 2009 3:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
For real
Two things….way different.
Russell scored twice as many points per as Russell, that wouldn’t really be useless
Check out nickandroll.blogspot.com
by n1ck34 on Jun 16, 2009 8:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dennis Rodman is a fine comparison in my opinion
But how about Marcus Camby? Because they are the exact same player.
www.TheDreamShake.com Co-Founder and Writer
by UofTOrange on Jun 17, 2009 9:42 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
great post dave
It doesn’t actually matter if people agree or disagree with the list. Everyone has their own list formulated exactly how they want it with their own biases of their own favorite players from their eras and for countless other reasons. It’s not fact, it’s opinion. You can’t tell someone they are wrong. With that being said, as a basketball fan I enjoyed the information from Russell’s era and the info from most of the other players as well. It’s hard comparing players from different eras, especially when they are responsible for creating and evolving the league like they have. Just because Russell dominated against 12 teams doesn’t mean he wouldn’t have dominated against 20 or 30 teams.
Anyways I wanted to see why exactly you left the mailman off the list? Just like any other Rockets fan I’d love to see the guy get kicked in the nuts, but part of the reason why I hate him so much was because of how good he was. Just wanted to see what you thought
by jroberts5 on Jun 16, 2009 3:28 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
The "era" argument against Russell is lame
Especially when you have like 5 other guys on the list, or honorably mentioned, who played in the same damn era (Bob Cousy, John Havlicek, Wilt, West, Robertson).
by erod on Jun 16, 2009 3:33 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
and...
Each of those players from the earlier era were able to contribute at high levels on BOTH ends of the floor. Shit, Chuck Hayes could have averaged double figure points in 1955.
by grungedave on Jun 16, 2009 3:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Please thats bullshit….only Wilt did that.
by erod on Jun 16, 2009 3:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
and yet
That does not negate the point that Bill Russell may have been a glorified Chuck Hayes on those Celtics teams… a very useful and important cog in the system, but not the player opponents would gameplan around to beat.
by grungedave on Jun 16, 2009 4:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah because he had 4 other guys who could score too not because he was a weak link
by erod on Jun 16, 2009 4:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
so tired of these posts
I’ve been reading this blog regularly for the last 6 months, and while I do like your Rockets posts and comments about the NBA, I cringe every time I see your posts about Kobe. The last thing I want to do is come to a Rockets website and see Kobe all over it.
And #6? Please…when he’s not hitting his jumper his team has a much less chance at winning because he doesn’t get other guys involved. This was apparent in these playoffs too. On bad shooting nights, guys like Odom and Gasol took over by rebounding and making put backs, no thanks to Kobe. Kobe is great, but not great enough to be cooed over on a Rockets website. Yes, it is the offseason, and I’m not trying to tell you what to write about on your blog, but I’m interested in the upcoming Summer League, draft and the NBA in general, not pieces about Kobe….the mainstream media takes care of that.
One more thing, your reasons for Kobe at #6 aren’t very convincing either. 1) He didn’t carry Shaq, DWade did that. 2) The media does like Kobe, they love him in the spotlight (good or bad) because that means more viewers. 3) Charles Barkley was considered the man on the original Dream Team, but we all know he wasn’t the best player on that team, perhaps just the most eager to beat up on inferior opponents.
by Sam#10 on Jun 16, 2009 3:39 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
no one is forcing you to read it...
by grungedave on Jun 16, 2009 4:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
right on!!
for pete’s sake, read the title..you’d probably get a clue on the content. :)
"One person working diligently alone can do wonders, but many people working harmoniously together can accomplish worlds."-Brandon Boyd"
by kobethebasketballmessiah on Jun 19, 2009 5:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
btw
The next person to tell me what I can and cannot write about on my own freakin’ blog is going on my “people to kill” list. Right after Billy Madison’s name.

by grungedave on Jun 16, 2009 4:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Technically...
this is SB Nation’s blog…you are working for the “man”
Check out nickandroll.blogspot.com
by n1ck34 on Jun 16, 2009 9:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
This just in!
grungedave was found giving “pleasure” to Kobe.
Learn about the game grungedave. I am going to go out on a limb and say you are a teenager with the whole summer on your hands.
by P_Dizzle on Jun 16, 2009 4:23 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
yeah
because SB Nation is sooo in the habit of hiring teenagers to run their blog sites.
If you disagree… write your own post about Kobe or something else. But here I get to post my own opinions. That’s kinda how it works.
by grungedave on Jun 16, 2009 4:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you're looking for a teenager with the whole summer on his hands...
Then Dave is not your man. That would be me.
The Dream Shake ...on Twitter.
"I think girls are probably just better shooters." - Steve Novak
by Tom Martin on Jun 16, 2009 11:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
you know what's hilarious?
when a dumbfuck from Utah accuses somebody of being a “teenager with the whole summer on his hands” after going for the juvenile “omg u sux cox” joke.
Your friendly neighborhood Dreamshake mod.
by Only_A_Lad on Jun 17, 2009 12:14 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Man what a bogus "follow-up"
“Meanwhile, there’s Russell, who in an era when teams scored more points than ever before somehow only managed to average 15.1 points per game for his career. "
That’s bogus man. The only person who truly dominated on both sides in that era was Wilt. Nobody else came close to Bill on the defensive end. NOBODY. Everybody else is from that era (sans Wilt) was put on that list for their offensive ability.
And it’s not like he sucked at offense. The man could score when it was needed….but like you said, he played with other Hall of Famers, who were the main scorers. If Wilt played for that Boston team, he may have been relegated to that same role too. But instead he played for a team where he was pretty much forced to be the go to guy on offense. The funniest thing is if you look at the averages for the Boston Celtics during that time period, all of the starters were very close in their averages each season. They shared the ball because they could, not because Bill Russell couldn’t score. And isn’t that the reason why he’s rings somehow don’t matter? Because he played on a stack team, right? So if you want to start adjusting his accomplishments down, then you gotta raise others up. You can’t adjust one way only man.
“Glorified Chuck Hayes”…man you must be out your damn mind…. yeah you let me know when Chuck Hayes rebounding totals come close to Russells.
Really what does Kobe do besides score? Is he a rebounding machine? Is he an assist man? No. He scores alot. And it’s not just that he scores alot, but he dominates while doing it. Russell dominated on defense, more so then anybody else in NBA history.
by erod on Jun 16, 2009 4:38 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
actually
If you normalize the rebounding totals per era… Bill Russell and Marcus Camby are not entirely dissimilar players. Camby just has the misfortunte of being drafted or traded to bad teams.
by grungedave on Jun 16, 2009 5:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dude
wow…I don’t even know what to say anymore…..just….wow.
by erod on Jun 16, 2009 5:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
dont' blame me
go do the statistical analysis…
Russell’s percentage of available rebounds is not entirely dissimilar from Camby’s percentage of available rebounds.
Teams played a MUCH faster pace in the 50s and 60s… and missed a hell of a lot more shots (so much for the “modern players can’t shoot” concept). There were upwards of 100+ rebounds available in some of these games. Russell averaging 22 boards a game is great… but not all that mind-boggling when compared to his contemporaries or to the standards of the era.
Russell would average around 14 rebounds a game in today’s game. Which is really, really good. But not alone enough to make him a top 10 player of all time.
Don’t get me wrong — Russell was an extremely good basketball player. But we are talking about the elite of the elite in today’s conversation. Russell just happens to not be among the top 10. That is not a sin. Or even an insult.
by grungedave on Jun 16, 2009 5:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Really what does Kobe do besides score? Is he a rebounding machine? Is he an assist man? No. He scores alot. And it’s not just that he scores alot, but he dominates while doing it. Russell dominated on defense, more so then anybody else in NBA history.
— i pressume you didnt watch the finals and the playoffs where the rockets and the nuggets were defeated by “the Lakers” and not Kobe alone..which i would eventually say-he passed the ball a lot, created opportinities for his team mates, rebounded, fascilitated.. oh and to inform you, he didn’t take the last shot that was supposedly designed for him, it was Fisher..and it wasnt even an assist for him, he passed the ball that was converted into another pass that got Fisher the opportunity to take the shot.
"One person working diligently alone can do wonders, but many people working harmoniously together can accomplish worlds."-Brandon Boyd"
by kobethebasketballmessiah on Jun 19, 2009 6:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I presume you are an idiot who didn’t get the point of my post.
by erod on Jun 24, 2009 7:38 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
My take
Russell and Wilt, though immensely talented, were beneficiaries of their time period. Nobody was that big back then. You put Russell and Wilt in today’s era and you’re looking at great players, but not Top Ten All-Time players.
That said, I do think Wilt is a top five all-time player, with russell hanging around the 9-10 spot.
The Dream Shake ...on Twitter.
"I think girls are probably just better shooters." - Steve Novak
by Tom Martin on Jun 16, 2009 6:07 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
YES!
http://www.theonion.com/content/news/nation_desperately_seeks
The Dream Shake ...on Twitter.
"I think girls are probably just better shooters." - Steve Novak
by Tom Martin on Jun 16, 2009 6:23 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Thank you for this
I am sorry I even mentioned Russell. I don’t know why I am even standing up for him….fuck the Celtics. Anyways, this is good stuff
Check out nickandroll.blogspot.com
by n1ck34 on Jun 16, 2009 9:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah, when I saw Dave posted this
that is the first thing I thought of.
Granted, it has brought out some hilarious commentary (Christ, I hope “P_Dizzle” sticks around), but attempts at ranking the best players of all time invariably do more to increase the level of “omg ur stupid lol” commentary, rather than the well-supported and thought-out variety.
Your friendly neighborhood Dreamshake mod.
by Only_A_Lad on Jun 16, 2009 10:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
wilt OWNS russell
have you seen their head to head numbers? wilt scored with ease on russell. nothing will ever convince me that if wilt and russell traded teams, wilt would have 13 rings in 13 seasons. and russell would have never won 1. wilt was a MONSTER. like dave said, the man freaking played every single minute of every single game for whole year. that is out of this world. let’s not even get into the 50+ points and 20+ rebound year he had and DIDN’T WIN MVP. that should be a crime
by Adamas on Jun 16, 2009 6:25 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
i don't really see the problem...
I kind of get why most people are reacting negatively to this, but it’s not as if dave ever said Bill Russel was a worthless piece of trash. He merely stated that there were other players that he thought were better than him. God forbid the fact that he has a different opinion from most people.
As i look at his other stats, like his FG% (which would be considered atrocious for an inside player nowadays), it doesn’t really scream “top 10 player of all time” to me either. Sure, I do think his body of work and attributed leadership make a compelling enough case for him to be in the group of “top 10 all time” (even i think those reasons are a tad bit overrated) but we need some consistency in criteria (i.e. production, “talent”, “skills”, awards, intangibles and how much do they really stack in favor for one person, does more rings equal better player? does higher PER mean better player? and so on)
Anyway, I see some of the “if Bill Russel were to play today he’d be a Marcus Camby-type” (Detroit days Ben Wallace seems more appropriate to me) sentiments floating around. If you translate the numbers, yes. But if he were around in this era, wouldn’t there also be an argument that the advances and improvements in basketball (more knowledge leading to better coaching and training of players, or the improvement of physical training regimen and equipment) then wouldn’t Bill Russel be the beneficiary of such improvements? Just wanted to get that out there.
contributing nothing substantial to your blog, since 2008!
by misterterrific on Jun 17, 2009 10:02 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
my thoughts didn't transition well there
but i hope you guys get what i’m trying to say.
contributing nothing substantial to your blog, since 2008!
by misterterrific on Jun 17, 2009 10:04 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have him from 11-13 on my list.
But to me, he’s not top 10.
www.TheDreamShake.com Co-Founder and Writer
by UofTOrange on Jun 17, 2009 10:09 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
And I agree, Dave and I had that discussion last night
He would certainly benefit from today’s coaching. He wouldn’t ever be taller than 6’8 though, so it is a limiting factor. Your point is well spoken and thought out. I appreciate that
www.TheDreamShake.com Co-Founder and Writer
by UofTOrange on Jun 17, 2009 10:10 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
do i lose points for constantly misspelling Russell?
contributing nothing substantial to your blog, since 2008!
by misterterrific on Jun 17, 2009 10:20 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here's my biggest issue with Russell
We’ll never know how good he really was. There is only rare footage from back then. The only reason people ever bring up for him being an all time great is the rings, but that is a TEAM accomplishment, not an individual one. He played with 5 Hall of Famers and his team was clearly the best in the league.
And one of his MVPs was utterly ridiculous. He won in 61-62 averaging 18.9 points (his career high) and 23.6 rebounds going 45.7% from the field and 59.5% from the line (that’s right, Shaq dominates him from the line). Meanwhile, all little old Wilt did was score 50.4 PPG (everyone’s career high), grab 25.7 rebounds, shoot 50.9% from the field and 50.4% from the line (okay, he sucked even worse). Wilt also lost to the Celtics (with Cousy, Heinsohn, KC and Sam Jones, Ramsey and Russell.) Wilt in his third season had on his team 4 rookies, 2 second year players, 1 third year and 1 fourth year. Don’t get me wrong, Arizin and Gola were HOF players so Wilt wasn’t talentless around him, but they weren’t Cousy or Sam Jones or really any of the 6 HOF that Russell’s team had. So Wilt Chamberlin took the Celtics to 7 games.
www.TheDreamShake.com Co-Founder and Writer
by UofTOrange on Jun 17, 2009 10:08 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
On Duncan...
“Simply put – the greatest power forward of all-time.” I don’t want to bash Duncan, but I don’t like this argument. Duncan is a back-to-the-basket player with limited shooting range. He guards opponents’ centers, at least at crunch time. He’s 6-11 and Hakeem was listed at 7-0. Somehow he can claim this title because he’s an inch too short to qualify as a center? Can’t we just compare him to other post players?
As an aside, there are precious few players in this conversation who play the wing (i.e. not guards or post players). I guess Bird and Barkley are really the only ones who have been mentioned?
by Metalate on Jun 17, 2009 10:37 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
two points
I think Elgin and the Big O would qualify as “wing” players to some extent.
As for Duncan… the dude has range. But if you can take a shot from 10 feet, why step back just to shoot from 17 to prove a point? Power Forwards play back-to-the-basket, too… but Duncan has never been the “center” on defense… he’s not the anchor, and he’s usually had someone on offense to play the low post while he plays the high post – more evidence that he’s a classic power forward.
by grungedave on Jun 17, 2009 10:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I appreciate the thoughts,
and you make good points about other wings. I understand Duncan is different than some other centers, but I think the difference is subtle. Duncan has some shooting range, but no more than Hakeem or Yao. Duncan can absolutely guard Shaq or Dwight Howard straight up in the post, but he is less comfortable guarding 4s who can stretch the floor, like Nowitzki, Rashard Lewis, or Rasheed Wallace.
Finally, whatever position/role you ask of Duncan on the floor, I think Hakeem could have played that same role: i.e., if you put Hakeem next to a traditional, plodding center, he could work out of the pick-and-roll on offense, be effective facing up from 12 feet or in the post, and he could guard both opposing centers and also power forwards without unusual range, like Amare, Bosh, Boozer, or Garnett. Hell, Hakeem played alongside Ralph Sampson his first 3+ years in the league. Doesn’t that make him a PF?
To me, the relevant questions:
Can you guard the best opposing big men (Shaq, Yao, Dwight) 1-on-1?(unquestionably yes)
Can you create offense in the post on anyone? (yes)
Are you comfortable stopping forwards off the dribble from 22 feet? (no)
Are you comfortable creating or working on offense from 18+ ft (no)
I’m comfortable just calling Duncan a 4/5 and moving on.
by Metalate on Jun 17, 2009 2:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs















