#37 NBA Player Of All-Time According to InsideHoops

[Deuce Bigalow]

Allen Iverson was voted the #36 NBA Player Of All-Time According to InsideHoops.

26.7 PPG | 3.7 RPG | 6.2 APG

2000-01 NBA Most Valuable Player
11

[Deuce Bigalow]

Big E, Elvin Hayes

#7 in career points
#4 in career rebounds
#20 in career blocks

Led team to a Championship
Should have been awarded FMVP
MVP
Scoring Title
12 All-Star Teams
6 All-NBA Teams
2 All-Defensive Teams
50,000 career minutes -3rd all-time

[Kblaze8855]

Elvin Hayes was never an MVP and I dont buy that anyone from the time feels he was the Bullets leader. Feels like a 30 years later assumption based on numbers. You actually see any of those finals? Ive seen like...a game and a half. Unseld was the MVP of what I saw and if he wasnt it was a guard I wanna say was Dandridge.

Id like to know what you saw to state otherwise as if something convinced you the people watching it and voting were wrong.

[FreezingTsmoove]

Bill Walton

[hangintheair]

Pistol Pete Maravich!!!!! Warar!!!

[Raz]

This series is turning into a laughing stock. Dave Cowens is still out there.

[Kblaze8855]

I chose to stop pointing him out as it was a lost cause. But it is funny we have votes being cast because guys won MVPs they didnt(Dave did) and finals mvps they should have won(Dave won it).

[StateOfMind12]

Vote - Bill Walton

Iverson should not be #36. :facepalm

[Young X]

Dominique Wilkins?

[pauk]

For the 4th time:

Dave Cowens -

1 x MVP
2 x Champion
Rookie of the Year
7 x All-Star
1 x 1st All-Defensive team
2 x 2nd All-Defensive team
3 x All-NBA 2nd team
1 x All-Star MVP
Hall of Famer

[kurple]

Vote - Bill Walton

Iverson should not be #36. :facepalm
:lol

[MiamiThrice]

Dave Cowens

[coin24]

The worm:banana:

[fsvr54]

dave cowens

[nycelt84]

Dolph Schayes

[Suckafree]

If we were to make an all time Celtics starting lineup, who starts at the 4??

Edit: assuming russell starts at 5

[crisoner]

BIG GAME JAMES WORTHY


http://i.ytimg.com/vi/0PuamN4MYVg/0.jpg
[LIST]
3

[Boston C's]

iverson at 36 is a joke...this list is failing because of the lack of knowledge of the older era...I personally wouldn't have iverson in my top 50

[colts19]

Bill Walton gets my vote.

It's a joke that a chucker like AI is ahead of players like Walton, Cowens, E. Hayes, B. Mcadoo, K. Mchale and many others.
AI wouldn't be in my top 75.

[MasterDurant24]

Bill Walton gets my vote.

It's a joke that a chucker like AI is ahead of players like Walton, Cowens, E. Hayes, B. Mcadoo, K. Mchale and many others.
AI wouldn't be in my top 75.
:roll: I wouldn't have AI this high either but I bet you can't name 25 players better than him that haven't already been on this list.

[Kblaze8855]

Elvin Hayes was taking 25-27 shots a game and shooting 42-44% at the top of his game...as a power forward....taking 27 shots to score 29 points on .428 shooting...in his prime...but AI is a chucker.

[G.O.A.T]

Elvin Hayes was never an MVP and I dont buy that anyone from the time feels he was the Bullets leader. Feels like a 30 years later assumption based on numbers. You actually see any of those finals? Ive seen like...a game and a half. Unseld was the MVP of what I saw and if he wasnt it was a guard I wanna say was Dandridge.

Id like to know what you saw to state otherwise as if something convinced you the people watching it and voting were wrong.

Unseld was the finals MVP, he was the consensus leader of that franchise throughout the decade and it was Bobby Dandridge who played the best during the '78 Finals. In fact he was the CBS Finals MVP choice. Dandridge continued his high level of play the next season having what was probably his greatest season posting 20-5-6 on 50/83% shooting and being nmed 2nd team all-NBA, first team All-Defense and finishing fifth in the MVP voting behind Kareem, Moses, George Gervin and teammate Elvin Hayes. Dandridge was however voted his teams MVP at the end of the season by the players and coaches.

As I noted once before, Unseld and Hayes came into the league together in 1968 as the 2nd and 1st pick of the draft. Hayes won the scoring title but Unseld got the MVP and ROTY. Upon voicing his frustration over not winning the awards Unseld got despite better numbers he finally reconciled. "well, I got the title that really matters" (the scoring title)

[Deuce Bigalow]

Elvin Hayes was taking 25-27 shots a game and shooting 42-44% at the top of his game...as a power forward....taking 27 shots to score 29 points on .428 shooting...in his prime...but AI is a chucker.
1978 NBA Playoffs - Elvin Hayes: 21.8 PPG | 13.3 RPG | 2.0 APG | 1.5 SPG | 2.5 BPG | 49.1% FG
1978 NBA Champions: Washington Bullets

bold - led team

[Kblaze8855]

Oh so...im not the only one who has google? I had been assuming only I had access to such information.

Did it by chance tell you why that makes him the finals MVP when the people who watched it felt he wasnt?

Because my google isnt giving me that information.

[Freedom Kid7]

Iverson over Kidd? I'm not one of those guys that gets pissed off over these things, but Iverson over Schayes, Kidd, Cowens, etc etc? What are you guys thinking?

I'm gonna vote for Cowens here.

[Deuce Bigalow]

It's just weird that Hayes wasn't considered the better player while leading the team in those areas. Tell me what Unseld did so good?

[Kblaze8855]

Games I watched he was getting key rebounds, setting absurd screens to get guards open, scoring when he had to, passing well(and not just his legendary outlet passes) and protecting the basket well at his size. Im sure that them winning the ring with Hayes not even playing didnt help either.

Elvin Hayes is no doubt underrated because people barely know he existed. But everything you read about him suggests he wasnt liked by anyone and wasnt all that respected either. when you have longtime coaches and writers who watched his entire career saying:



"He could do three things — rebound, block shots, and shoot a high percentage on turnaround jumpers from the left box. He couldn't pass, handle, play honest defense, or hit a clutch shot to get into heaven. In addition, he paid no attention to the basketball alphabet of Xs and Os. All he cared about was "me-ball-basket." "



who am I gonna listen to? You? Because you have google? What I watched....hayes wasnt the best on the floor. Those who watched it all....didnt think eh was either. Seems everyone says Unseld or Dandridge.

But you know better because of basketball reference?

Id just like to know what you saw that I didnt.

[Legends66NBA7]

Since there is an Unseld vs Hayes debate going on, thought I would drop these 2 articles about the 2 and their lone title team:

http://www.truthaboutit.net/2009/09/elvin-hayes-versus-wes-unseld.html

http://www.examiner.com/article/32-years-ago-elvin-hayes-wes-unseld-and-washington-bullets-win-nba-championship

Long, but really good reads.

[INDI]

cowens

[Kblaze8855]

Good links there. And really.....

My god.......



When Abe Pollin led the NBA’s first venture into China in the summer of 1979, not every member of the Washington Bullets shared the team owner’s enthusiasm. As players and their wives poured off a bus to take in the splendor of the Great Wall, Elvin Hayes and Dave Corzine refused to budge.
Pollin peered back and asked Hayes if he was coming. “I’ve seen a big wall before, Mr. Pollin,” Hayes told him. Wes Unseld tried to persuade Hayes by telling him the wall was the only man-made structure that can be seen from outer space. To which Hayes responded, “I’m never going into outer space.”
Pollin was so infuriated afterward he swore that he’d never take his team on another trip. “One of the wonders of the world,” Pollin said recently in a telephone interview, “and they didn’t get out of the bus.”




Hayes once told (http://www.brokencowboy.com/2005/06/an_interview_wi.html) Tex Winter, “I’m an all-star. Don’t expect me to pass. It’s like asking Babe Ruth to bunt.”



Hayes, who reinforced his reputation as basketball’s quintessential choker in Game 1 by hiding in the fourth quarter while being terrorized by Silas, accepted media criticism with E-quanimity. “I ain’t talkin’ to no press,” he said. “All that stuff is history. You want history, you can go to the library.”



“Take Me Out Coach”
The famed title run wasn’t the first time Hayes was accused of being a choker. In the late 60s, but mostly early 70s, the New York Knicks and the Bullets had a heated rivalry (http://www.nba.com/encyclopedia/knicks_bullets_rivalry.html). A particular first round series in April of 1974 that went seven games stands out to many.
The stats will say that Hayes averaged 25.9 points, 15.9 rebounds and three assists on .531 from the field against the Knicks. But the stats won’t tell you is that some guy named John Gianelli (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/g/gianejo01.html) held one of the greatest players in NBA history in check during the deciding game of a hotly contested series. In the seventh game, Hayes only scored 12 points on 5-15 from the field. Gianelli, only 23 years-old at the time, was allowed to score 12 points and snag 15 rebounds, 11 of them offensive. The Knicks took game seven 91-81.
Now, you don’t necessarily have to throw around the word ‘choke’, there wouldn’t have been a seventh game without Hayes. Then again, when your best player simply does not show up in such an important game, and elects to retract into a shell instead of using his talents in other ways, something is clearly amiss.
Gianelli thought Hayes was injured because he kept asking out of the game. Afterward, Hayes told reporters that he wanted to go to the bench because he wasn’t playing well. Giving up on your teammates, your coach, and the fans like that is unacceptable.


Even talked shit on Unseld:



“Our guards get criticized for not playing defense, our forwards for not scoring, but I never hear a word about our center. Mitch Kupchak can shoot. He ought to play more.”

Wes trying to keep it civil....



“I do my talking to other players face-to-face, not through the press. I don’t dwell within Elvin. I don’t know what he’s thinking and I don’t care. The person I know is the basketball player, and right now he is one of the best in the league. What he’s done verifies that. We’ve had more than our share of run-ins off the court. But when he’s on the court he’s a professional and that’s all that matters.”

[Bigsmoke]

Gary Payton

[StateOfMind12]

Iverson would be at the end of my top 50, not in the middle of it.

Gary Payton, Jason Kidd, Paul Pierce, Bill Walton, Dave Cowens, and even Dwight Howard should be above him.

[Bigsmoke]

Iverson would be at the end of my top 50, not in the middle of it.

Gary Payton, Jason Kidd, Paul Pierce, Bill Walton, Dave Cowens, and even Dwight Howard should be above him.

Dwight needs more work in

not saying they he will be ranked higher than Iverson at some point but just not right now.

[coin24]

Iverson would be at the end of my top 50, not in the middle of it.

Gary Payton, Jason Kidd, Paul Pierce, Bill Walton, Dave Cowens, and even Dwight Howard should be above him.


Pierce and Dwight over AI??:biggums:

[TheBigVeto]

Dave Cowens.

[ScalabrineStan]

Walton

[L.Kizzle]

How do Nash and AI go over Kidd and Payton? All four played in roughly the same era (90; 94 through 96 drafts.)

I'm guessing they went higher do to their MVP Awards in the 2000s but GP and Kidd were better.



Anyway, my vote goes to Adolph once again. Schayes was a top player for 3 different eras. Can't say the same about Hayes, Cowens, Walton, GP or whoever else is getting votes.

[Round Mound]

Kevin McHale? Look at What He Did To Sampson in the 1986 Finals...

[ganja0710]

gary payton

[G.O.A.T]

Kevin McHale? Look at What He Did To Sampson in the 1986 Finals...

As much as I love McHale, at what number of this voting does Sampson become an option?

We're coming up on McHale territory to be sure, but it's his versatility more than any single series is the reason why. McHale could be your second to fifth best player, start or come of the bench and his primary contribution could be on offense or defense. Not many guys outside of the top 15 you can say that about. McHake's only major argument against is that he was never an alpha player or a teams star and his personality seemed to suggest he couldn't be.

[dyna]

Bill Walton

[RaininTwos]

Vote - Bill Walton

Iverson should not be #36. :facepalm
You seriously cannot vote for an injury plagued center like Bill Walton right before saying an accomplished superstar like Iverson shouldn't be 36. That just doesn't look right.

[Money 23]

Iverson would be at the end of my top 50, not in the middle of it.
:biggums:

[G.O.A.T]

You seriously cannot vote for an injury plagued center like Bill Walton right before saying an accomplished superstar like Iverson shouldn't be 36. That just doesn't look right.
`
It's fine if you value peak a lot. Walton proved he could lead a team to a title. Iverson, even with a decade plus prime never did so.

I'll vote Walton because I have him in my top 30, Iverson is outside my top 40.

It should be said that I love Iverson as a player and think he gets a bad rap too often as a chucker. That guy was elite no question, not sure he could lead you to a title but I'd give him equal odds as a guy like Pippen or David Robinson in that role.

[StateOfMind12]

Tallies

Dave Cowens - 6
Bill Walton - 5
Dolph Schayes - 2
Elvin Hayes - 1
Pistol Pete - 1
Dennis Rodman - 1
James Worthy - 1
Gary Payton - 2
Kevin Mchale - 1

I didn't count ScalabrineStan since he has less than 100 posts, that is the rule right?

[RaininTwos]

`
It's fine if you value peak a lot. Walton proved he could lead a team to a title. Iverson, even with a decade plus prime never did so.

I'll vote Walton because I have him in my top 30, Iverson is outside my top 40.

It should be said that I love Iverson as a player and think he gets a bad rap too often as a chucker. That guy was elite no question, not sure he could lead you to a title but I'd give him equal odds as a guy like Pippen or David Robinson in that role.

Walton was at his peak for like two seasons, I don't understand any ranking system that has him ahead of Iverson unless they are weighing championships very heavily.

I also do not understand the comparisons to Pippen or David Robinson in terms of the probability of leading his team to a title. Iverson actually led his team to the NBA Finals so I would think he would be clearly a step about those two.

[Bigsmoke]

Walton and his 2 good seasons shouldn't put him in the top 40

[GP_20]

This list is an absolute disgrace. Back when I was posting, there were more intelligent posters. Gary Payton was voted #28 (should've been higher), and now we are at #37 and he has just a couple of votes?

Part of it had to do with me actually posting back then taking way the ignorance posters had when it came to the All-Time great PG Gary Payton. But still this is just sad.

List fail

[Deuce Bigalow]

I didn't count ScalabrineStan since he has less than 100 posts, that is the rule right?
correct

[RRR3]

Tracy McGrady


I'll vote for T-Mac as much as I damn want if we're accepting votes for Walton, which I assume means we can vote for players who had great peaks. T-Mac had a great peak (2002-03) so there. This is "NBA Players" too, so don't give me that "Walton was a great college player" shit. This vote better count too, I see no difference in voting for T-Mac based off his short peak if we're basing Walton votes off 1 and a half years (didn't watch Walton, not arguing T-Mac was better, nor do I think T-Mac should be nearly this high, I'm just voting to make a point).

[G.O.A.T]

Walton was at his peak for like two seasons, I don't understand any ranking system that has him ahead of Iverson unless they are weighing championships very heavily.

I also do not understand the comparisons to Pippen or David Robinson in terms of the probability of leading his team to a title. Iverson actually led his team to the NBA Finals so I would think he would be clearly a step about those two.

It's not about longevity. It's the opposite. It's about results. Walton got better results with 18 healthy prime months than Iverson did in a decade.

That's the end of the argument and it's a very good one. If you value longevity heavily (thus you'd likely have Kareem top three and Karl Malone top 15) than Walton probably wouldn't crack your top fifty.

But, to reiterate, Walton proved he could do what only about 15-20 players have ever done. Win a title as the teams best player and an MVP candidate.

[G.O.A.T]

Tracy McGrady


I'll vote for T-Mac as much as I damn want if we're accepting votes for Walton, which I assume means we can vote for players who had great peaks. T-Mac had a great peak (2002-03) so there. This is "NBA Players" too, so don't give me that "Walton was a great college player" shit. This vote better count too, I see no difference in voting for T-Mac based off his short peak if we're basing Walton votes off 1 and a half years (didn't watch Walton, not arguing T-Mac was better, nor do I think T-Mac should be nearly this high, I'm just voting to make a point).

McGrady's peak doesn't compare to Walton's though. It's like Comparing Bellamy in '62 to Russell that year.

[RRR3]

It's not about longevity. It's the opposite. It's about results. Walton got better results with 18 healthy prime months than Iverson did in a decade.

That's the end of the argument and it's a very good one. If you value longevity heavily (thus you'd likely have Kareem top three and Karl Malone top 15) than Walton probably wouldn't crack your top fifty.

But, to reiterate, Walton proved he could do what only about 15-20 players have ever done. Win a title as the teams best player and an MVP candidate.
Iverson got pretty damn close:confusedshrug:


McGrady's peak doesn't compare to Walton's though. It's like Comparing Bellamy in '62 to Russell that year
I didn't watch Walton, so I won't comment on that. My point is that it's ridiculous to vote Walton in this high considering how short of a span of time he played at an all-time great level. That also is inconsistent with the way a lot of people have voted for the majority of this project. Why are peaks suddenly super important? Besides, by this logic, if Kevin Durant won FMVP this year, he'd be in the "argument" for being ranked around here, which is silly (although KD will likely finish very high all-time, he's still very young).

[StateOfMind12]

Bill Walton's peak is like top 10 of all-time, Tracy Mcgrady's peak wasn't even better than Kevin Durant's. Awful comparison. :oldlol:

[RaininTwos]

It's not about longevity. It's the opposite. It's about results. Walton got better results with 18 healthy prime months than Iverson did in a decade.

That's the end of the argument and it's a very good one. If you value longevity heavily (thus you'd likely have Kareem top three and Karl Malone top 15) than Walton probably wouldn't crack your top fifty.

But, to reiterate, Walton proved he could do what only about 15-20 players have ever done. Win a title as the teams best player and an MVP candidate.
I see where you are coming from but I cannot judge players like that. Longevity plays a factor in my rankings because I believe that being a great player for long periods of time should be rewarded. In reality Walton got something amazing done once and then fizzled it out, that doesn't seem like a great career to me imo and I cannot rank him ahead of players like Jason Kidd who was two games away from doing the same thing as Walton while having thrice as much great years.

[chazzy]

Tracy McGrady


I'll vote for T-Mac as much as I damn want if we're accepting votes for Walton, which I assume means we can vote for players who had great peaks. T-Mac had a great peak (2002-03) so there. This is "NBA Players" too, so don't give me that "Walton was a great college player" shit. This vote better count too, I see no difference in voting for T-Mac based off his short peak if we're basing Walton votes off 1 and a half years (didn't watch Walton, not arguing T-Mac was better, nor do I think T-Mac should be nearly this high, I'm just voting to make a point).
Despite having such a short prime, Walton does have the top shelf accolades to go with his great peak play: MVP, MVP runner up, title as the man + FMVP

[RRR3]

Bill Walton's peak is like top 10 of all-time, Tracy Mcgrady's peak wasn't even better than Kevin Durant's. Awful comparison. :oldlol:
http://forum.surfermag.com/photopost/uploads/30188/overyourhead.jpg

[RRR3]

Despite having such a short prime, Walton does have the top shelf accolades to go with his great peak play: MVP, MVP runner up, title as the man + FMVP
Wes Unseld has an MVP and a FMVP:confusedshrug:

[L.Kizzle]

Bill Walton's peak is like top 10 of all-time, Tracy Mcgrady's peak wasn't even better than Kevin Durant's. Awful comparison. :oldlol:
Durant just had a better team.

Don't compare their team records compare their stats.

[G.O.A.T]

Iverson got pretty damn close:confusedshrug:

Sort of close. He did get to the finals, but if his team wasn't in the East, I'm not sure they win more than one or maybe two playoff series. What Iverson did in 2001 isn't significantly more impressive than what Webber did in '02, Kidd did in '02 or '03, Westphal did in '76, David Thompson did in '78, Payton in '96, Ewing in 92 thru '94, like Baylor did in '59, Unseld did in '71, KJ did in '90, English did in '85, Aguirre did in '88, Gervin did in '83, Moncreif did in '84 etc. A lot more guys have come as close as Iverson than actually did it like Walton.

[RRR3]

Durant just had a better team.

Don't compare their team records compare their stats.
Please don't argue with him about T-Mac. He'll derail the thread.

[StateOfMind12]

Durant just had a better team.

Don't compare their team records compare their stats.
Durant last season was better than Tmac ever was. It's not close. Tmac was a better ball-handler and passer and that was it. When it came to scoring, shooting, efficiency, defense, rebounding, etc. Durant wins out.

So voting Tmac at #37 to make a point that peak is all that matters isn't valid because Tmac wasn't that dominant in his peak anyways.

[RaininTwos]

Iverson got pretty damn close:confusedshrug:
Kidd too

[chazzy]

It's not close.
You're either overrating Durant or underrating 03 Tmac if you think it's not close

[RRR3]

You're either overrating Durant or underrating 03 Tmac if you think it's not close
It's RG bro

[L.Kizzle]

Durant last season was better than Tmac ever was. It's not close. Tmac was a better ball-handler and passer and that was it. When it came to scoring, shooting, efficiency, defense, rebounding, etc. Durant wins out.

So voting Tmac at #37 to make a point that peak is all that matters isn't valid because Tmac wasn't that dominant in his peak anyways.
Mac was a better score, he could score in more ways than Durant. Durant is the better shooter and more efficient. Mac was the better defender. When <ac wanted too, he could play lock down defense. Rebounding is about equal.

And McGrady is my favorite player ever but I'm not voting for him anytime soon.

[DatAsh]

I don't understand any ranking system that has him ahead of Iverson unless they are weighing championships very heavily.

The only ranking system that makes any sort of logical sense for determining the best player,

"Which player would give me a better chance at winning a titles(s) over the course of his career?"

Two years of Bill Walton gives you a better chance at winning one or two championships than fifteen years of Iverson.

If your goal is to win, the decision should be pretty clear.

[StateOfMind12]

You're either overrating Durant or underrating 03 Tmac if you think it's not close
Fine, it's close, but clear that Durant was better. Happy?


Mac was a better score, he could score in more ways than Durant. Durant is the better shooter and more efficient. Mac was the better defender. When <ac wanted too, he could play lock down defense. Rebounding is about equal.

And McGrady is my favorite player ever but I'm not voting for him anytime soon.
Why does it matter if McGrady can score more ways than Durant can when Durant was the one scoring far more efficiently, far better in the clutch, and far better in the post-season? As soon as Prince started guarding Tmac in the 03 playoffs, Tmac was literally shut down. Durant was destroying every defender thrown at him from Ron Artest to Shane Battier to Lebron James to Stephen Jackson, it didn't matter. It was always 30+ ppg with 50% FG for Durant when he played them in the post-season.

That's like saying Carmelo Anthony is the best scorer in the league and I really hope you aren't one of the people that believe that.

McGrady wasn't a better defender either. He was the most inconsistent and inactive defender I ever saw. He was only a good man to man defender but there are other aspects to defense other than man to man and that's help defense where McGrady was invisible in whether he tried or not. He didn't know how to play help defense. I go to Durant on defense for being more consistent. Consistency is key as well.

I have no problem concluding rebounding is equal though but it shouldn't make a difference anyways.

[Legends66NBA7]

I was actually still hoping there was still a debate on these two:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_Y_CvIxe4gBg/SwJkhYfK09I/AAAAAAAANWI/t9-Mi6nkjtw/s1600/hayes_unseld.gif

Dave Cowens, Jason Kidd, and Dolph Schayes are the most likely to win this and the next 5 spots, along with Hayes and Unseld.

I don't see Walton or T-Mac this high yet.

[L.Kizzle]

Fine, it's close, but clear that Durant was better. Happy?


Why does it matter if McGrady can score more ways than Durant can when Durant was the one scoring far more efficiently, far better in the clutch, and far better in the post-season? As soon as Prince started guarding Tmac in the 03 playoffs, Tmac was literally shut down. Durant was destroying every defender thrown at him from Ron Artest to Shane Battier to Lebron James to Stephen Jackson, it didn't matter. It was always 30+ ppg with 50% FG for Durant when he played them in the post-season.

That's like saying Carmelo Anthony is the best scorer in the league and I really hope you aren't one of the people that believe that.

McGrady wasn't a better defender either. He was the most inconsistent and inactive defender I ever saw. He was only a good man to man defender but there are other aspects to defense other than man to man and that's help defense where McGrady was invisible in whether he tried or not. He didn't know how to play help defense. I go to Durant on defense for being more consistent. Consistency is key as well.

I have no problem concluding rebounding is equal though but it shouldn't make a difference anyways.
Durant has no trouble with those defenders you named, neither did McGrady. They were both much longer and that's what helps. You know why Prince was good on McGrady, because Prince was one of the only guys in the league longer than McGrady, length messes with him. There was a game during Mac scoring title runs in which the T-Wolves had KG guard him most of the game and you know what happened ... Mac ended up with four points because the length bothered him. The right person with length will bother KD but it will be harder cause as long as Mac is/was KD is even longer.

McGrady was a better defender. I did say he was inconsistent but I also said when he puts his mind to it, he could be great> I've seen him be a much better defender than I have seen KD.

[Sakkreth]

Cowens.

[tmacattack33]

Durant last season was better than Tmac ever was. It's not close. Tmac was a better ball-handler and passer and that was it. When it came to scoring, shooting, efficiency, defense, rebounding, etc. Durant wins out.

So voting Tmac at #37 to make a point that peak is all that matters isn't valid because Tmac wasn't that dominant in his peak anyways.

No way. T-mac was definitely a better defender than Durant.

Also, you list scoring, efficiency, and shooting as different terms, making it appear that Durant wins 4-2.

I can do the same...playmaking, passing, vision. T-mac wins in all three. Also he wins in driving and posting-up.


Anyway, let's break it down really simple.

1. Offense - I Don't know.

2. Defense - easily T-mac. His defense during peak was a B+/A-. Durant right now is at a C+.

3. Rebounding - Durant, though T-mac was better with respect to position


T-mac's peak is very high.

Certainly higher than 37, and certainly higher than current Durant, who took advantage of injuries (Dwight, Wade, Rose...and even CP3, who is still not back to 2008 pre injury form, which would certainly be better than current Durant) to become a consensus number two player in the league this year.

[StateOfMind12]

No way. T-mac was definitely a better defender than Durant.
No he wasn't. Consistency matters, effort matters, help defense matters, everything matters, and because of that overall Durant was a better defender than Tmac was.

Tmac at his peak was not better than Durant was last season.


McGrady was a better defender. I did say he was inconsistent but I also said when he puts his mind to it, he could be great> I've seen him be a much better defender than I have seen KD.
Consistency matters. Plus, McGrady was probably better man defender than Durant was when he was motivated (which was essentially never) but he was never a better help defender, motivated or not.

[TheeBeast]

I'll vote Cowens

[WockaVodka]

Dave Cowens.

[tmacattack33]

No he wasn't. Consistency matters, effort matters, help defense matters, everything matters, and because of that overall Durant was a better defender than Tmac was.

Tmac at his peak was not better than Durant was last season.


Consistency matters. Plus, McGrady was probably better man defender than Durant was when he was motivated (which was essentially never) but he was never a better help defender, motivated or not.


Peak Mcgrady > Current Durant.

Many things are too close to tell, and you can't go wrong either way. This is not one of them.

If you do not agree, you will lose a lot of credibility in basketball circles.

Durant has a long way to go before having one of the better peaks of all time.

[StateOfMind12]

Peak Mcgrady > Current Durant.

If you do not agree, you will lose a lot of credibility in basketball circles.

Durant has a long way to go before having one of the better peaks of all time.
:oldlol: I'll definitely listen to a guy named tmacattack when talking about Tmac. I doubt there would be any bias or homerism when talking about him.

Durant was better than Tmac ever was. I'm more than positive most people acknowledge it around here anyways. I remember looking at a thread asking where 2003 Tmac would rank in today's league and most people said he would be behind both Durant and Lebron.

and lol at you talking about losing credibility, like you have any. :oldlol:

[coin24]

Peak Mcgrady > Current Durant.

Many things are too close to tell, and you can't go wrong either way. This is not one of them.

If you do not agree, you will lose a lot of credibility in basketball circles.

Durant has a long way to go before having one of the better peaks of all time.


This..

Durant stans..:facepalm

[Deuce Bigalow]

:oldlol: I'll definitely listen to a guy named tmacattack when talking about Tmac. I doubt there would be any bias or homerism when talking about him.

Durant was better than Tmac ever was. I'm more than positive most people acknowledge it around here anyways. I remember looking at a thread asking where 2003 Tmac would rank in today's league and most people said he would be behind both Durant and Lebron.

and lol at you talking about losing credibility, like you have any. :oldlol:
You're RG. You hate T-Mac and think Yao>Dwight, so you must certaintly have no bias or homerism at all towards T-Mac :rolleyes:

[Rolando]

For the 4th time:

Dave Cowens -

1 x MVP
2 x Champion
Rookie of the Year
7 x All-Star
1 x 1st All-Defensive team
2 x 2nd All-Defensive team
3 x All-NBA 2nd team
1 x All-Star MVP
Hall of Famer

This: Cowens

[tmacattack33]

:oldlol: I'll definitely listen to a guy named tmacattack when talking about Tmac. I doubt there would be any bias or homerism when talking about him.

Durant was better than Tmac ever was. I'm more than positive most people acknowledge it around here anyways. I remember looking at a thread asking where 2003 Tmac would rank in today's league and most people said he would be behind both Durant and Lebron.

and lol at you talking about losing credibility, like you have any. :oldlol:

I don't know if you are overrating Durant or underrating T-mac.

But T-mac circa 2003 was similar in level to Wade circa 2009. And if that Wade was still playing there would be no doubt that he'd be the number 2 player in the league right now.

Durant is number two right now at a time when there is a huge hole there due to injuries.

[WillC]

Dolph Schayes.

But I'd be very happy if Cowens or Walton gets in here to stop the madness.

[Deuce Bigalow]

#37 NBA Player Of All-Time According to InsideHoops Voting

10- Dave Cowens
5- Bill Walton
3- Dolph Schayes
2- Gary Payton
1- Elvin Hayes
1- Pete Maravich
1- Dominique Wilkins
1- Dennis Rodman
1- James Worthy
1- Kevin McHale
1- Tracy McGrady

[Kblaze8855]

This list is an absolute disgrace. Back when I was posting, there were more intelligent posters. Gary Payton was voted #28 (should've been higher), and now we are at #37 and he has just a couple of votes?

Gary Payton being #28 was one of the most indefensible things in the history of basketball discussion. And it not happening without someone with a massive bias towards him putting on a huge argument should make it clear that all one has to do is talk to idiots about a subject long enough for them to give in and make an idiotic decision.

Gary Payton probably shouldnt be top 40 and perhaps not top 50. He wasnt even approaching it in 96 and even if you feel hes better than a couple people who did nothing he did after that justifies ranking over at least 7 or 8 players not in the league at the time.

Last list...guy ranked #94 was all NBA first team over Gary at his peak when he was years past his. Gary wasnt nearly as highly regarded in his time or all time to justify ranking over MVPs who led teams to titles and he was over 7 of those players last time. Of course hes going to drop.

If people think it out he should drop 20 or more spots. In fact...in 07 ISH voted Dirk 20 spots behind Gary. Its never going to happen again.

Gary shouldnt have been even close to top 28 then and now we have to add titles to the resume of Dirk, KG, Lebron, and so on?

Payton did nothing of note Kevin Durant has not and he played worse and was considered worse relative to his era in doing it.

Him being #28 was one of the most obvious cases of idiots being easily manipulated ive ever seen and if he comes in before like...45 or 50...it will be more of the same.

You were on here claiming he was top 3 in 98 meaning Jordan, Shaq, or Malone were worse....and there were too many 17 year olds to remember that relative to guys like them nobody cared about Gary Payton. Talking about MVP votes as if many actually ranked him that high as a player....

Shit was a joke. A bad joke.

[GP_20]

Gary Payton being #28 was one of the most indefensible things in the history of basketball discussion. And it not happening without someone with a massive bias towards him putting on a huge argument should make it clear that all one has to do is talk to idiots about a subject long enough for them to give in and make an idiotic decision.

Gary Payton probably shouldnt be top 40 and perhaps not top 50. He wasnt even approaching it in 96 and even if you feel hes better than a couple people who did nothing he did after that justifies ranking over at least 7 or 8 players not in the league at the time.

Last list...guy ranked #94 was all NBA first team over Gary at his peak when he was years past his. Gary wasnt nearly as highly regarded in his time or all time to justify ranking over MVPs who led teams to titles and he was over 7 of those players last time. Of course hes going to drop.

If people think it out he should drop 20 or more spots. In fact...in 07 ISH voted Dirk 20 spots behind Gary. Its never going to happen again.

Gary shouldnt have been even close to top 28 then and now we have to add titles to the resume of Dirk, KG, Lebron, and so on?

Payton did nothing of note Kevin Durant has not and he played worse and was considered worse relative to his era in doing it.

Him being #28 was one of the most obvious cases of idiots being easily manipulated ive ever seen and if he comes in before like...45 or 50...it will be more of the same.

You were on here claiming he was top 3 in 98 meaning Jordan, Shaq, or Malone were worse....and there were too many 17 year olds to remember that relative to guys like them nobody cared about Gary Payton. Talking about MVP votes as if many actually ranked him that high as a player....

Shit was a joke. A bad joke.

Are you serious? So you're basically calling everyone on ISH that voted for Payton an idiot lol? It's actually more like the people who are not voting for Payton now and didn't then (people like you) are just IGNORANT.

Putting up 'long' arguments doesn't convince people. People usually don't read those arguments. Putting good arguments convinces people. The people voting right now are the same people (intellectually) that were voting then. So what the difference? Right now no one like me is making a strong argument for Payton and giving him the credit he deserves because in general he is underrated.

Once you make a strong argument for him and take away the lack of knowledge people have about how good Payton was, he would and should be voted in the Top 30.




It's not indefensible, if I was posting here it would happen again. Just look at this list, Isiah is at #25, Frazier and Stockton at #32 and #33 (apprx. where Payton would have dropped down to with the emergence of LeBron and Dirk). Payton should be higher than Frazier and Stockton, so Top 30 is within reach for him.

[Kblaze8855]

It doesnt take an argument. Look at the #38 voting. It took....his name being mentioned in such a way as to suggest hes been wronged. And just like that 3 people(2 of which arent old enough to remember him if they told the truth about their ages in other topics) vote for him.

It isnt about reality. Its about people being easily manipulated. And it does not work on anyone like me...who has spent a quarter century deeply interested in basketball history. I dont hear Gary Paytons name with his laughable resume(relative to this level of player) and get impressed. I hear it and compare it in my head to Dolph Schayes who did 5 times more. I hear it and think of Dave Cowens beasting vs Kareem to win his team a ring....and then another one....and winning MVP.

What I know isnt assigned to me by someone who sets out to do it because I know more than the people trying to alter my opinion. It isnt just some....natural basketball knowledge. I know NBA history because I care about it and always have.

So im not being told about Garys meager all nba first teams and some 60 win team he couldnt do anything with and being impressed. Im being told about it and thinking about Paul Westphal and Dennis Johnson...im considering the people flat out ranked over Payton in his prime...im not a child to be manipulated and I watched every second of Gary Paytons career.

Dude was not elite and has no business ranked among those who were. Not when MVPs and guys who led teams to rings are still out.

However....most people do not know what I know so they can be assigned an opinion.

Doesnt make them stupid outside basketball. It does make them ignorant of basketball history. And knowing that....what they vote doesnt mean anything to me. Its just people who dont know better being assigned an opinion by someone biased enough to not care who deserves what. You flat out disrespect the history of this game with this shit and that most dont know enough about that history and your absurd degree of bias to see it is out of my hands.

Im not trying to play counterweight to an idiot to convince the ignorant. I wouldnt want the ignorant with me to begin with. But people who care enough to look into these things are rare. Which is fine. People have shit to do.....

[RaininTwos]

The only ranking system that makes any sort of logical sense for determining the best player,

"Which player would give me a better chance at winning a titles(s) over the course of his career?"

Two years of Bill Walton gives you a better chance at winning one or two championships than fifteen years of Iverson.

If your goal is to win, the decision should be pretty clear.
I never said that winning a championship shouldn't be rewarded, I have just refuse to rank a guy so high off of two years. Walton was great for a second and then he fell apart. How is that going to be ranked over one of the best SG's of all time?

[Bigsmoke]

Sort of close. He did get to the finals, but if his team wasn't in the East, I'm not sure they win more than one or maybe two playoff series. What Iverson did in 2001 isn't significantly more impressive than what Webber did in '02, Kidd did in '02 or '03, Westphal did in '76, David Thompson did in '78, Payton in '96, Ewing in 92 thru '94, like Baylor did in '59, Unseld did in '71, KJ did in '90, English did in '85, Aguirre did in '88, Gervin did in '83, Moncreif did in '84 etc. A lot more guys have come as close as Iverson than actually did it like Walton.

Webber's Kings didnt need Webber to win 50+ games.

FACT!!

[StateOfMind12]

I don't know if you are overrating Durant or underrating T-mac.

But T-mac circa 2003 was similar in level to Wade circa 2009. And if that Wade was still playing there would be no doubt that he'd be the number 2 player in the league right now.

Durant is number two right now at a time when there is a huge hole there due to injuries.
09 Wade > 12 Durant > 03 Tmac

Your argument is invalid.

[Money 23]

12 Durant > 03 Tmac
:oldlol:

God no ...

I can't even take you seriously.

I forgot you're that creeper Yao Ming stan

[RRR3]

:oldlol:

God no ...

I can't even take you seriously.

I forgot you're that creeper Yao Ming stan
:applause:
Yes that's rg all right. He's trying to be a "serious" poster and has somehow managed to convince a lot of people. Some of us never forget though.

[StateOfMind12]

:oldlol:

God no ...

I can't even take you seriously.

I forgot you're that creeper Yao Ming stan
:oldlol: You didn't even have Durant in your top 5.

Durant is better than Tmac ever was, no doubt. Tmac was a better passer and ball-handler but the rest go to Durant. Durant was the better scorer, better shooter, more clutch, just as good of a rebounder, and a better defender.

Durant was better and the numbers back me up. What backs you up again?

[StateOfMind12]

:applause:
Yes that's rg all right. He's trying to be a "serious" poster and has somehow managed to convince a lot of people. Some of us never forget though.
http://fotos.fotoflexer.com/cc26652f34248cf5599d3b672b23063e.jpg
http://fotos.fotoflexer.com/cc26652f34248cf5599d3b672b23063e.jpg
http://fotos.fotoflexer.com/cc26652f34248cf5599d3b672b23063e.jpg
http://fotos.fotoflexer.com/cc26652f34248cf5599d3b672b23063e.jpg
http://fotos.fotoflexer.com/cc26652f34248cf5599d3b672b23063e.jpg


























































http://fotos.fotoflexer.com/cc26652f34248cf5599d3b672b23063e.jpg




Next.

[RRR3]

http://fotos.fotoflexer.com/cc26652f34248cf5599d3b672b23063e.jpg
http://fotos.fotoflexer.com/cc26652f34248cf5599d3b672b23063e.jpg
http://fotos.fotoflexer.com/cc26652f34248cf5599d3b672b23063e.jpg
http://fotos.fotoflexer.com/cc26652f34248cf5599d3b672b23063e.jpg
http://fotos.fotoflexer.com/cc26652f34248cf5599d3b672b23063e.jpg


























































http://fotos.fotoflexer.com/cc26652f34248cf5599d3b672b23063e.jpg




Next.
^afraid to post his own pic. Jealous I'm the next Slash:rockon:

[StateOfMind12]

^afraid to post his own pic. Jealous I'm the next Slash:rockon:

http://fotos.fotoflexer.com/cc26652f34248cf5599d3b672b23063e.jpg


























http://www.gifsforum.com/images/gif/lol/grand/kobe-bryant-lol-eccbc87e4b5ce2fe28308fd9f2a7baf3-1660.gif

[RRR3]

Found a pic of RG:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_odWXR949XV8/S_S6XEy2pyI/AAAAAAAAAD8/97TiMUczeD4/s1600/smile_chinese_man.gif

[StateOfMind12]

You definitely found me alright. I'd much more proud that I look like that than some pudgy Jewish kid who knows nothing about basketball :oldlol:

[RRR3]

You definitely found me alright. I'd much more proud that I look like that than some pudgy Jewish kid who knows nothing about basketball :oldlol:
:roll:

[GP_20]

Gary Payton being #28 was one of the most indefensible things in the history of basketball discussion. And it not happening without someone with a massive bias towards him putting on a huge argument should make it clear that all one has to do is talk to idiots about a subject long enough for them to give in and make an idiotic decision.

Gary Payton probably shouldnt be top 40 and perhaps not top 50. He wasnt even approaching it in 96 and even if you feel hes better than a couple people who did nothing he did after that justifies ranking over at least 7 or 8 players not in the league at the time.

Last list...guy ranked #94 was all NBA first team over Gary at his peak when he was years past his. Gary wasnt nearly as highly regarded in his time or all time to justify ranking over MVPs who led teams to titles and he was over 7 of those players last time. Of course hes going to drop.

If people think it out he should drop 20 or more spots. In fact...in 07 ISH voted Dirk 20 spots behind Gary. Its never going to happen again.

Gary shouldnt have been even close to top 28 then and now we have to add titles to the resume of Dirk, KG, Lebron, and so on?

Payton did nothing of note Kevin Durant has not and he played worse and was considered worse relative to his era in doing it.

Him being #28 was one of the most obvious cases of idiots being easily manipulated ive ever seen and if he comes in before like...45 or 50...it will be more of the same.

You were on here claiming he was top 3 in 98 meaning Jordan, Shaq, or Malone were worse....and there were too many 17 year olds to remember that relative to guys like them nobody cared about Gary Payton. Talking about MVP votes as if many actually ranked him that high as a player....

Shit was a joke. A bad joke.

What is your obsession with MVPs? You are acting like winning an MVP is so damn important even though you know that players with lesser MVPs are often greater than players with more MVPs? So I couldn't care less who has an MVP and who doesn't. The players you compare against all played in different eras too, good luck Schayes winning MVPs over Jordan. Same goes to leading teams to championships. 1st of all that's a team accomplishment, 2nd of all i'm sure Cowens and Schayes didn't run into teams like the 72 Bulls in the finals.

So get out of here with your team and MVP talk. That's all relative to their competition. Come back with their ON COURT play, basically how good of basketball players were they. Fine even adjust for the time they played (not competition, so giving Schayes and Cowens some extra points). And Payton would go Top 25 All-Time if we went that route.


One more thing. Gary Payton was very underrated in his prime. He was not that flashy type of PG. So that is part of why he was underrated. So when you say "I did not hear too much of him....", well thats why. He was underrated. So for you, if a player is underrated, you stay ignorant and he stays underrated? that's just stupid logic. If you want to stay ignorant, stay that way. Just because you didn't hear about him doesn't mean much. It just means he was UNDERRATED.

[Kblaze8855]

What is your obsession with MVPs? You are acting like winning an MVP is so damn important even though you know that players with lesser MVPs are often greater than players with more MVPs? So I couldn't care less who has an MVP and who doesn't. The players you compare against all played in different eras too, good luck Schayes winning MVPs over Jordan. Same goes to leading teams to championships. 1st of all that's a team accomplishment, 2nd of all i'm sure Cowens and Schayes didn't run into teams like the 72 Bulls in the finals.


For one...there are some basic errors there that make me assume you have not looked into the people you just mentioned....secondly...

The Kareem/Oscar Bucks could likely beat anyone.

And the sonics spent most of the 90s being knocked off several of them failures with great records. They didnt just lose to the Bulls. They lost to....the league.

Oh and for someone who says "So what?" to award votes you sure didnt mind leaning on them to justify your claim that Zo was only a great defender in two seasons.



So get out of here with your team and MVP talk. That's all relative to their competition. Come back with their ON COURT play, basically how good of basketball players were they. Fine even adjust for the time they played (not competition, so giving Schayes and Cowens some extra points). And Payton would go Top 25 All-Time if we went that route.

Gary falls even more there. you start talking about the best players....the people a GM would build a team around? just off the bigman advantage Gary falls. Gary falls behind people like Durant, Dwight Howard, and so on....plenty of people who didnt have the career but were flat out considered better. Going by....best player? Nah. Gary doesnt want that.

Gary being top 25 is more than idiotic. Its the kind of thing so far out I just chalk it up to you being a childish fan who lets emotion make your decisions.



One more thing. Gary Payton was very underrated in his prime. He was not that flashy type of PG. So that is part of why he was underrated. So when you say "I did not hear too much of him....", well thats why. He was underrated. So for you, if a player is underrated, you stay ignorant and he stays underrated? that's just stupid logic. If you want to stay ignorant, stay that way. Just because you didn't hear about him doesn't mean much. It just means he was UNDERRATED.


So people who arent considered elite...that you decide in fact were...12-20 years later...they must be underrated. You cant just be wrong. The people watching cant be right. If the world is against you...the world is wrong. You see clearer in retrospect than people voting a past his prime Tim over Payton for all NBA did in their present.

Perfect defense of "You know people didnt even consider him elite right?". Just say...they were wrong.

Well done. Player never considered elite...but you call him top 25 ever....so....people were wrong. he was elite. No explaining it of course. Cant be done. So dont bother. Got it.

[GP_20]

For one...there are some basic errors there that make me assume you have not looked into the people you just mentioned....secondly...

The Kareem/Oscar Bucks could likely beat anyone.

And the sonics spent most of the 90s being knocked off several of them failures with great records. They didnt just lose to the Bulls. They lost to....the league.

Oh and for someone who says "So what?" to award votes you sure didnt mind leaning on them to justify your claim that Zo was only a great defender in two seasons.

I'm not saying let's completely ignore MVPs and awards, but to use it as a basis of your argument for 2 players playing in different eras is just stupid lol.

This is your logic:

A > B
C > D

So A must be > D

Think about what you said, think about why the above is what your logic is, and think about why that's just stupid. To help you out, Cowens or Schayes is A, their competition is B, Payton's competition is C, and Payton is D.




Gary falls even more there. you start talking about the best players....the people a GM would build a team around? just off the bigman advantage Gary falls. Gary falls behind people like Durant, Dwight Howard, and so on....plenty of people who didnt have the career but were flat out considered better. Going by....best player? Nah. Gary doesnt want that.

Gary being top 25 is more than idiotic. Its the kind of thing so far out I just chalk it up to you being a childish fan who lets emotion make your decisions.

Are you kidding? Who would take players like Durant and Dwight over Payton? With Gary Payton, you have a play who could anchor your offense and defense and have them play at a high level (as he has shown in his career). Durant? :oldlol:





So people who arent considered elite...that you decide in fact were...12-20 years later...they must be underrated. You cant just be wrong. The people watching cant be right. If the world is against you...the world is wrong. You see clearer in retrospect than people voting a past his prime Tim over Payton for all NBA did in their present.

Perfect defense of "You know people didnt even consider him elite right?". Just say...they were wrong.

Well done. Player never considered elite...but you call him top 25 ever....so....people were wrong. he was elite. No explaining it of course. Cant be done. So dont bother. Got it.

Lol, are you listening to what you are saying? let me reverse everything you just said.

"Most people just can't be wrong. The people watching are always right. If someone disagrees with the general public, they are wrong."

Perfect defense of "Payton is not elite" Just say...the general public didn't think so ur wrong :facepalm

Owned?

[kurple]

i vote that stateofmind posts a pic of himself. it's only fair

[Kblaze8855]

Are you kidding? Who would take players like Durant and Dwight over Payton?

Says enough.