Slam Magazine's 50 Best NBA Players

whacked · Jun 24, 2009

Originally Posted by thekunk07

what's so funny fucknuts?

Having recently talked to various NYers about LeBron, I'm convinced y'all are out licking his nuts secretly in hope that "King" James would go to the Knicks in a few years.

I love Magic, but he'd be vulnerable to the same criticism rained upon Nash: no D. Stockton is rated too high, same w/ Duncan, albeit the latter only slightly. Boring is in I guess.

sho'nuff · Jun 24, 2009

Originally Posted by thekunk07

^kidding?

i think these kinds of lists are unfair when you are comparing people who finished their careers with players who are still developing their careers.
in a few years who knows lebron will be in the top 10. we got to see them as a consummate whole and imo i think kobe should be 1 or 2 after his career is done with.

Rambo · Jun 24, 2009

Originally Posted by sho'nuff

kobe bryant should definitely be higher. perhaps 1 or 2
Srsly? Higher than Wilt, Jordan, Chamberlain, Magic, and Oscar? That's a bit too much Laker love.

thekunk07 · Jun 24, 2009

i think wilt redefined his position helped redefine the league IMO

Originally Posted by Slopho

Thaat far above Wilt? I think you could make an argument.

whacked · Jun 24, 2009

Originally Posted by kwiteaboy

The guy averaged 35/9/7 in the playoffs. What more could he do? Will you give him personal credit if the Cavs get him some quality supporting players and he wins a title then? Or does he have to lead four lumps of **** to a title to get credit?

A dozen of players put up dashing stats every year on bad teams too, all but a handful who later join winning systems where they put up less eyepopping numbers become forgotten. What's your point again?

thekunk07 · Jun 24, 2009

i'm not a knicks fan, i just think lebron is that good.

Originally Posted by whacked

Having recently talked to various NYers about LeBron, I'm convinced y'all are out licking his nuts secretly in hope that "King" James would go to the Knicks in a few years.

I love Magic, but he'd be vulnerable to the same criticism rained upon Nash: no D. Stockton is rated too high, same w/ Duncan, albeit the latter only slightly. Boring is in I guess.

kwiteaboy · Jun 24, 2009

Originally Posted by whacked

A dozen of players put up dashing stats every year on bad teams too, all but a handful who later join winning systems where they put up less eyepopping numbers become forgotten. What's your point again?

That's the thing: no one has put up the numbers that he has, especially at his age. You give players individual credit when they join better teams? That's absurd. How about rating players on their individual value added?

Ambulance Chaser · Jun 24, 2009

Pretty good list. Nice to see Timmy D. getting some love. He is criminally underappreciated due to the lack of flash in his game. I would like to see Olajuwon a couple of places higher. He won two NBA titles with no other stars on his team besides an aging Clyde Drexler on the second title team. I think a lot of people undervalue these titles because Jordan was playing baseball at the time.

whacked · Jun 24, 2009

Originally Posted by kwiteaboy

That's the thing: no one has put up the numbers that he has, especially at his age. You give players individual credit when they join better teams? That's absurd. How about rating players on their individual value added?

1. Oscar Robertson

2. Basketball is a team game. Rating its participants merely on "individual value added", however flawed it is measured, is absurd.

Slopho · Jun 24, 2009

Originally Posted by thekunk07

i'll go:

1. mj
2. wilt
3. magic
4. bird
5. kareem
6. lbj
7. russell
8. oscar
9. duncan
10. stockton

Also Kunk, you have Stockton with no Malone? My earlier question still remains, how can you put Magic above Kareem when Magic didn't win anything without Kareem? Also, how can you put LBJ above Olajuwon?

whacked · Jun 24, 2009

matadorpoeta · Jun 24, 2009

Originally Posted by whacked

1. Oscar Robertson

2. Basketball is a team game. Rating its participants merely on "individual value added", however flawed it is measured, is absurd.

exactly. it's team game so you should not judge players on how many championships but how they play as individuals. if michael jordan had spent his career with the clippers, he'd have zero titles, but he would have been the same player. why penalize his legacy because of his teammates?

kwiteaboy · Jun 24, 2009

Originally Posted by whacked

1. Oscar Robertson

The NBA averaged 27 more FGA per game in Robertson's time than it does now. Adjust for pace.

whacked · Jun 24, 2009

Originally Posted by matadorpoeta

exactly. it's team game so you should not judge players on how many championships but how they play as individuals. if michael jordan had spent his career with the clippers, he'd have zero titles, but he would have been the same player. why penalize his legacy because of his teammates?

The Bulls sucked royally during Jordan's first 10 years.

Are you even a basketball fan anyway?

Ambulance Chaser · Jun 24, 2009

Originally Posted by Slopho

My earlier question still remains, how can you put Magic above Kareem when Magic didn't win anything without Kareem?
Wayne Gretzky never won a Stanley Cup without Mark Messier. Messier won a Stanley Cup without Gretzky. Does it follow that Messier is a greater hockey player than Gretzky?

Not saying that Kareem doesn't deserve to be above Magic, just that titles won together and apart shouldn't be the decisive factor in ranking players.

Slam Magazine's 50 Best NBA Players

Distinguished Member

grrrrrrrr!!

Timed Out

Stylish Dinosaur

Distinguished Member

Stylish Dinosaur

Senior Member

Stylish Dinosaur

Distinguished Member

Distinguished Member

Distinguished Member

Distinguished Member

Senior Member

Distinguished Member

Stylish Dinosaur

FEATURED PRODUCTS

Featured Sponsor

Definitely full canvas only

Half canvas is fine

Really don't care

Depends on fabric

Depends on price

Forum Sponsors

Forum statistics

FOLLOW STYLEFORUM ON: