#56 NBA Player Of All-Time According to InsideHoops

[Deuce Bigalow]

Sam Jones was voted the #55 NBA Player Of All-Time According to InsideHoops.

17.7 PPG | 4.9 RPG | 2.5 APG

10

[wally_world]

KD35 :pimp:

[StateOfMind12]

Vote - Kevin Durant

[pauk]

Durant had a batter career already over Reggie Miller? Oh man... i quit...

[Kblaze8855]

Considering hes done everything that Reggie ever did on a court...and much more....and is ranked higher...and is flat out better at basketball...while Reggie won nothing he didnt....yes. Id rather my son have Durants career accomplishments even if I have to spread them out over 15 years. Good to know he would be one of the best in the world.

Dennis Johnson as well. Finals MVP....3 time champ....same all stars..all nba first team...9 time all D...led the Sonics and Suns to good records/playoff runs to prove it wasnt just being a Celtic that made him a winner. Had amazing finals games, game winning shots and multiple game winning defensive plays in the finals, and considered by Bird to be better than Mchale and Parish.

Id rather have that career.

Id also rather have Robert Parish....Jojo Whites....lot of guys.

I would rather have Reggies over a lot of guys better than him skills wise...guys like Pistol Pete...Chris Webber..Mitch..they exist. But I wouldnt take his career over like....3 Celtics who still arent in.

Shit id take Paul Westphals career. He was an all star just as many times, made more all NBA first teams than Reggie did third teams, made I think 2 finals one of them as a superstar, almost made like 5 most of them as a good to great player, and put up better numbers. But nobody knows who he is outside being a coach so he wont even make top 100. Didnt last time. Nobody even voted for him once. Its as if he played in the 30s but he was still a 22/5 player in low minutes with Bird and Magic in the league.

The fame is half the battle.

[MasterDurant24]

Durant had a batter career already over Reggie Miller? Oh man... i quit...
Yes, easily. Durant is a superstar, led the leauge in scoring 3 years in a row, 3 1st All NBA teams, and led his team to the Finals. Way more than Reggie could even dream of.

Vote for Durant.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Tiny Archibald

[Fudge]

I'll vote for Durant after Parish gets on the board.

I vote for Parish.

[pauk]

Now i have seen everything.... you know what? Lets just keep Reggie completely out of this.... with your logic why not? Everybody is better... Reggie was just a scrub 18 ppg averaging sceletor... that didnt do anything... meh.. just some clutch shot here and there.... overrated.... in only 5 years Durant accomplished a better legacy... he was 1st all-nba 3 times man and he is just a better talent, god damn.... i say god damnnnnnnn..... didnt play much, but he is a better talent, its enough to just lace up your shoes and just PLAY even one season and you already have a better legacy than Reggie if you are more talented..... my god thats much more impressive.....

[colts19]

Now i have seen everything.... you know what? Lets just keep Reggie completely out of this.... with your logic why not? Everybody is better... Reggie was just a scrub 18 ppg averaging sceletor... that didnt do anything... meh.. just some clutch shot here and there.... overrated.... in only 5 years Durant accomplished a better legacy... he was 1st all-nba 3 times man and he is just a better talent, god damn.... i say god damnnnnnnn..... didnt play much, but he is a better talent, its enough to just lace up your shoes and just PLAY even one season and you already have a better legacy than Reggie if you are more talented..... my god thats much more impressive.....

This, Reggie Miller for christ sake

[jlip]

Repost:

Not that I'm voting for him, but I'm still amazed at the fact that Jerry (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/lucasje01.html) Lucas (http://www.nba.com/historical/playerfile/bio.html?player=jerry_lucas) keeps getting absolutely no votes.

He is the only player not named Wilt or Pettit to have avg. 20ppg and 20rpg in a season. He did it twice. Pettit did it only once. While I don't particularly know that much about his reputation amongst his peers, his resume', on paper, is quite impressive. I do know that he was known as one of the best shooting forwards of the 60's.

1964 NBA Rookie of the Year
1964-65 NBA All-Star Game MVP
NBA champ (1973 Knicks)

7X All star
3X NBA All-NBA (1st)
2X NBA All-NBA (2nd)

Led league in fg% in 1964 (Edged out Wilt)
Was a top 4 rebounder for most of his career. (Normally right behind Wilt and Russell)

[Kblaze8855]

Kevin Durant didnt just....be more talented. He has...at like 25...already accomplished as much winning wise as Reggie and is flat out better in doing it. Shaq made the first top 50 voted on by his peers(other legends) having accomplished less than Durant has now. I wanna say he was never all nba first team(Hakeem and Drob in the way), never led in scoring(second I think), and was swept in the finals and made an ECF.

Durant is 96 Shaq. He doesnt need to do anything more to be top 50 or so. People are gonna keep bumping him up and the player hes been for years is gonna be the guy compared to the greats of the game.

He has little left to prove. And what he does have left...Reggie never did himself and never approached it while being the level of player he is. Durant>Reggie is gonna be so obvious even arguing otherwise might be ban worthy. And hes been good enough to say so for like...4 years.

[DatAsh]

Considering hes done everything that Reggie ever did on a court...and much more....and is ranked higher...and is flat out better at basketball...while Reggie won nothing he didnt....yes. Id rather my son have Durants career accomplishments even if I have to spread them out over 15 years. Good to know he would be one of the best in the world.

Dennis Johnson as well. Finals MVP....3 time champ....same all stars..all nba first team...9 time all D...led the Sonics and Suns to good records/playoff runs to prove it wasnt just being a Celtic that made him a winner. Had amazing finals games, game winning shots and multiple game winning defensive plays in the finals, and considered by Bird to be better than Mchale and Parish.

Id rather have that career.

Id also rather have Robert Parish....Jojo Whites....lot of guys.

I would rather have Reggies over a lot of guys better than him skills wise...guys like Pistol Pete...Chris Webber..Mitch..they exist. But I wouldnt take his career over like....3 Celtics who still arent in.

Shit id take Paul Westphals career. He was an all star just as many times, made more all NBA first teams than Reggie did third teams, made I think 2 finals one of them as a superstar, almost made like 5 most of them as a good to great player, and put up better numbers. But nobody knows who he is outside being a coach so he wont even make top 100. Didnt last time. Nobody even voted for him once. Its as if he played in the 30s but he was still a 22/5 player in low minutes with Bird and Magic in the league.

The fame is half the battle.

You seem to really have it out for Reggie Miller. I don't necessarily disagree with the content of your posts, but I do think you're still weighing peak too heavily in comparison with longevity.

[G.O.A.T]

Kevin Durant didnt just....be more talented. He has...at like 25...already accomplished as much winning wise as Reggie

Anything else 100% untrue you'd like to try and pass off as fact. You're hurting your own argument with hyperbole and distortion that thoughtful/intelligent fans can see through.

People here know you know your stuff, but it's not trolls or fan boys or even casual fans that are taking issue with your assessment of Reggie. People who agree with you on where he should be ranked are even telling you that you're going overboard.

[haji_d_robertas]

Kevin Durant

[WillC]

So many great players to choose from: Tiny Archibald, Hal Greer, Earl Monroe, Billy Cunningham, Jerry Lucas, Dave DeBusschere, etc.

But my vote goes to Pete Maravich.

[MiamiThrice]

Pau Gasol
http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.179239!/img/httpImage/image.jpg

-2x NBA Champion (2009, 2010)
-Led 2010 Lakers to the championship as the best player
-4 x NBA Allstar
-18.7 PPG, 9.2 RPG 3.2 APG career numbers
-3 All NBA teams
-Two silver medals as the best player
-One of the most skilled bigmen of all-time
-Made the cover of the NBA video game in Spain

[DatAsh]

My vote will be for Hal Greer

[inclinerator]

ray allen

[Fudge]

ray allen
He's been voted in already.

[Kblaze8855]

Anything else 100% untrue you'd like to try and pass off as fact. You're hurting your own argument with hyperbole and distortion that thoughtful/intelligent fans can see through.

People here know you know your stuff, but it's not trolls or fan boys or even casual fans that are taking issue with your assessment of Reggie. People who agree with you on where he should be ranked are even telling you that you're going overboard.

100% untrue? They both lost in the finals. Making more conference finals while playing 3 times longer is not winning more. Its being 50 while the other guy is 25. Reggie did nothing Durant didnt. Should be quite clear what I meant.


And I couldnt care less if telling the truth as I see it is seen as overboard. If you cant explain why im wrong I dont much care what your opinion is.

I dont exactly mind you saying I am...because I know you arent making an emotional decision on a whim. I also know most arent you and most arent me....and just dont care about history.

Like some guy called "Colts" who id assume is from Indiana is voting for Reggie Miller because he looked into what guys like Westphal, Dennis Johnson, and Hal Greer did and decided Reggie is better.

Its emotional attachment/fan of the 90s votes.

Such things annoy me. If there is one time a casual fan should care enough to look into the facts its when making an effort to rank players all time.

That said....Reggie Miller should probably be higher than Pistol Pete who I just saw get a vote.

I couldnt possibly be less impressed with Pistol Pete. There are 3 major things I consider....

How good you are
How good you were considered in your time/your accolades
What you managed to win

Reggie might....MIGHT...beat out Pete in 2 of those. Middle one is...tough. Voted all NBA first team yet your GM says nobody would trade for you? Eh.

Reggie has enough of an edge in the 3rd category to justify the discussion on if the gap in their talent is wide enough to ignore the rest.

Id have to say...it is not.

And id have to say...id want to have Reggies career over Petes.

There are people...HOF guys...legends...my process puts Reggie ahead of.

A guy like Durant? Hes clearly better at basketball, hes clearly higher ranked in his time/has more accolades, and Reggie didnt win anything he didnt.

So I consider it obvious who is greater.

That is not always the case. We are approaching the level where Reggie wont be behind many others in all 3. Pistol Pete for example....

[Whoah10115]

People like to look at accolades a little too much. It's really just checking off certain boxes and saying "See".


Durant has not yet had a greater career than Miller, but whatever. Why don't we rank Grant Hill already? I'd take prime Hill over current Durant. And at worst it's not a big gap. Is Hill gonna end up anywhere near the top 75? Shit, should have just retired, as adding in years as a solid player, following years just not playing are somehow worse. So I have digressed...

[Kblaze8855]

Kevin Durant has done things and won more than Grant Hill did. Reggie Miller took 13 or 14 years to make the finals...which is the peak of his accomplishments...Durant has already done that. I can have Grant Hills accomplishments...or Reggies...id probably take Reggies. Id be a worse player. My team would have done more. Grant didnt win a playoff series till he was like 38. Doesnt make him a worse player. It knock him down in the "What did he get done" department.

Considering that and the fact hes been injured so much...you can argue Reggie is "greater" if he isnt better. There is no such case to be made with Durant. There is no "But Reggie was able to...." to say. Reggie led a finals team and lost. Durant did too. Once thats a wash...there is the rest. The rest...is firmly on Durants side.

With Grant? Cant say that. He is the superior player.

He did not accomplish as much team wise.

That isnt exactly his fault. But its the world we have.

So I see a case for Reggie>grant. Its at least worth discussing. Durant? Nah.

[DatAsh]

100% untrue? They both lost in the finals. Making more conference finals while playing 3 times longer is not winning more. Its being 50 while the other guy is 25. Reggie did nothing Durant didnt. Should be quite clear what I meant.


One guy made more conference finals because, as you said, he "play[ed] 3 times longer". Playing 3 times longer in itself is not winning more - you're right there, but it is playing 3 times longer, and it is improving you and your team's chances of winning, which is the ultimate goal of the game - and the ultimate measuring stick between players all time.



Like some guy called "Colts" who id assume is from Indiana is voting for Reggie Miller because he looked into what guys like Westphal, Dennis Johnson, and Hal Greer did and decided Reggie is better.

It's an unfortunate and inevitable truth whenever these types of threads come along, but I would hope that most people would at the very least research the guys within the general vicinity.


Its emotional attachment/fan of the 90s votes.

You might be right.


Such things annoy me. If there is one time a casual fan should care enough to look into the facts its when making an effort to rank players all time.

Agreed


That said....Reggie Miller should probably be higher than Pistol Pete who I just saw get a vote.

Agreed


How good you are

How good you were considered in your time/your accolades

What you managed to win

Your first criteria, and the first part of your second criteria should in combination be your one and only criteria. The remaining criteria - along with whatever stats you deem meaningful - should be used as a method for assessing your first criteria. Accolades, Team Success, Statististics - all of these should be tools for answering the "who was a better player?" question, and not a ranking criteria in and of themselves.



A guy like Durant? Hes clearly better at basketball, hes clearly higher ranked in his time/has more accolades, and Reggie didnt win anything he didnt.

So I consider it obvious who is greater.

How exactly do you consider who is greater? Current Durant is better than any version of Reggie ever, and by a decent margin, but we can't ignore the fact that Reggie's played more than three times the amount of games.

For all we know, this could be Durant at his absolute best, I doubt it, but even if he doesn't manage to top his current self on a per season basis, he'll continue to improve as a player overall up until the point in which he becomes a net negative for the average team.

If my goal was to win a single championship given one year of play, I'd take Durant without hesitation over Reggie, and would probably do the same for Durant in comparison with a large number of the guys above him at this point.

But, if my goal was to win as many championships as possible over a 20 year period the question of who to pick becomes a lot more difficult. Does 5 years of Kevin Durant - only 3 of which can realistically be considered as prime years - give me, on average a better chance of winning than 18 years of Reggie Miller, over a 20 year span? I'm honestly not sure.

[Kblaze8855]

Im not ignoring that Reggie played 3 times as long. Im considering it and placing it in favor of Durant. 3 years of Durant being what he is now vs maybe...10-12 years of roughly prime Reggie...and Durant has already done the greatest thing Reggie managed. You asked if 20 years of reggie gives you a better chance to win....

We already saw. 20 years of Reggie....was 20 years of not winning. Durant can claim hes done all Reggie did far as taking his team to a level of success...and he did it in 3 years as a serious top flight player. Id say that makes it more likely he has more in him than Reggie could do in 20.

Reggies 20 has come and gone. Durants few....already reached as high. The question is can he go higher. We know Reggie didnt. Book is written.

Durants book is barely started and its first chapter is as good as reggies climax.

Id say tie goes to the youngster. All he can do is go beyond what Reggie did. He cant do less. This isnt Tmac or Grant Hill. There is far less to say he still has to do.

[StateOfMind12]

Grant Hill will easily be at least in the top 70. I'm curious to know whether people think Hill or Tmac's career was better though. That is a tough one imo.

[L.Kizzle]

Billy Cunningham.

How is Durant gettin votes now?

[Deuce Bigalow]

What happened to all the Chris Paul votes? He was getting some a couple threads ago and hasn't got one since.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Billy Cunningham.

How is Durant gettin votes now?
3x All-NBA First Team
Top 5 in MVP voting 3 times, runner up twice
3x NBA scoring champion
Led Thunder to the NBA Finals in 2012

:confusedshrug:

[L.Kizzle]

3x All-NBA First Team
Top 5 in MVP voting 3 times, runner up twice
3x NBA scoring champion
Led Thunder to the NBA Finals in 2012

:confusedshrug:
5 seasons.

If he retired tonight, he's not close to a top 50 player.

[nycelt84]

Jerry Lucas

[Freedom Kid7]

My vote will be for Hal Greer
I, too, vote for Hal Greer

[dyna]

Kevin Durant

[Miller for 3]

Man some people are too impressed by raw boxscore stats and statpadding against crap teams. Durant's best games came against the Twolves and Nuggets for a reason. Anyone can put up big numbers against terrible defenses. The playoffs is where it really matters because the stars play more, teams have more time to gameplan, and the game slows down. Reggie always played his best against top 10 defenses for a reason. He would take it easy against crap teams and let his teammates pad their stats in blowouts. Reggie's career high in shots was 29, and in that game he scored 57 points. Durant, Kobe and Lebron have a 29 shot night like once a week. If Reggie was as big a statpadder as today's guards, he would be averaging 30+ on the same GOAT level efficency. Try watching Reggie against the GOAT Knicks defense. Hell even in his mid 30s he was lighting up the Nets, who were the best D in the league. I love how people criticize guys like AI for being a ballhog, but they fail to respect a true team player like Reggie who sacrificed his own stats of the good of his teammates.



InB4 a long winded "Ya he scored what did he win" ignorant post from Kblaze

[coin24]

Reggie on this one:cheers:

How the fu*k is durant getting votes?:roll:
The most one dimensional player ever,and he's only at the start of his career..

By that way of thinking shouldn't you be voting for tmac aswell??^^

[Kblaze8855]

Ignorant is people who dont remember Dennis Johnson or look into him acting like Reggie Miller is better than him because of playoff games they didnt watch. Me...I suspect we watched the same thing and got very different things out of it.

And much of what you said is true. Reggie really wasnt as involved in his offense as modern star guards and his teammates did a lot more than given credit for.

He was damn good at pulling a big shot out of his ass in a close game he had done little in for 45 minutes though. Im not sure and im not about to check but...I think he hit 14 game winners one season in the late 90s. 98 perhaps?

I feel like I read that somewhere.

Were he a more reliable good shot creator and his offense not gone into so many dry spells im sure less of those games come down to that but....whole other issue.

[Whoah10115]

Again, anyone who argues that Reggie was never anything special and that he was nearly as prone to having average games in the playoffs as he was to having great games...


have still failed to respond to my post in the last thread. Career 20.6PPG in the playoffs. In his first 15 years in the NBA, made the playoffs 12 times, played a total of 109 playoff games, averaging less than 20PPG once: when they lost to the Bulls in 7 in 1998...19.9PPG. His career average over that period: 23.5PPG.


Yea, no standout.

[StateOfMind12]

Man some people are too impressed by raw boxscore stats and statpadding against crap teams. Durant's best games came against the Twolves and Nuggets for a reason. Anyone can put up big numbers against terrible defenses. The playoffs is where it really matters because the stars play more, teams have more time to gameplan, and the game slows down.
Your post is invalid because Durant dominated in every time and in every game in the 2012 post-season.

Then factor in how Durant was the more versatile, better all-around player, and was a more reliable scorer due to the fact that Durant could score creating off the dribble much better than Miller could and it's easy to know who is better.

[Jacks3]

dry spells? the miller pacers were consistently of the best offensive teams in the league and their offense got even better in the post-season.

[Kblaze8855]

Yes. No standout. Im not acting like 23ppg is amazing for a guy who does literally nothing else that justifies getting into an NBA game. Amazing is Jerry West dropping 40ppg the entire playoffs in a finals run. Amazing is Bernard King vs the Pistons. Duncan vs the Lakers in 03. Dirk vs the Thunder.

Again....low standards for a guy who isnt good enough to justify the use of high ones.

Talking to me about 23 and change and nothing else as if a guy like Kevin Durant wouldnt be clowned and called overrated if he played on such a level.

[fsvr54]

So many players are better than Reggie Miller. This is a joke.

[Kblaze8855]

dry spells? the miller pacers were consistently of the best offensive teams in the league and their offense got even better in the post-season.

Im not talking about final game numbers. Im talking about making shots to stop runs...to hold leads...to come back when down. Those teams didnt lose because they came through when it counted.

I was briefly worried in game 7 in 98. Briefly. And then they were still the Pacers.

[L.Kizzle]

So many players are better than Reggie Miller. This is a joke.
How many, name them all?

[KOBE143]

DRose

Youngest MVP ever..

[Kblaze8855]

Im gonna go ahead and vote this time and just say Reggie.

Clearly I dont think he belongs but id rather get him out of the way. Im gonna be sitting around doing nothing at work tomorrow and id rather kill time talking about other people.

There must be something interesting to say about Robert Parish. Id like to get there. And every topic till he gets in will start with someone annoyed he didnt get in already and I find it difficult to ignore foolish comments about subjects im passionate about.

Just give him my vote. Its not about the final numbers anyway. Not to me at least. Just something to talk about...and hes clearly getting in at least somewhat soon anyway.

[Miller for 3]

Yes. No standout. Im not acting like 23ppg is amazing for a guy who does literally nothing else that justifies getting into an NBA game. Amazing is Jerry West dropping 40ppg the entire playoffs in a finals run. Amazing is Bernard King vs the Pistons. Duncan vs the Lakers in 03. Dirk vs the Thunder.

Again....low standards for a guy who isnt good enough to justify the use of high ones.

Talking to me about 23 and change and nothing else as if a guy like Kevin Durant wouldnt be clowned and called overrated if he played on such a level.

Youre getting too caught up in boxscore stats and not considering that Reggie was a team player. Scoring 23 ppg while not dominating the ball or only taking 16 shots a game is crazy. There's a reason why role players excelled on the Pacers. Imagine if Reggie got to play with a Pippen or Ewing instead of Smits. Reggie could carry a team (see the 2000 squad he led to the Finals), be a killer 2nd option (shame we never got to see him in a Drexler 95 type role) or even late in his career be one of the best 3rd/4th options in the league. And how do you explain Reggie dominating the best defenses in the league year in and year out? From 1990 to now, no one played against tougher defenses in the playoffs than Reggie. One would expect his numbers to fall off the most then right? Reggie's level of the play in the postseason increased more than anyone else during that time. It wasn't a one time fluke, it was routine.

[Kblaze8855]

I dont need to explain what didnt happen. nobody has ever done as little as Reggie and had it called dominating as they lost every year. No need to start.

And no I would not really expect Reggies numbers to drop vs a good defense. Guys who are isolation scorers and slashers would be much worse off vs a physical penetration preventing defense than a guy who runs around multiple screens looking to get open....or just not get the ball.

What opponents shoot vs a team does not tell you what kind of scorers they are good at limiting.. Reggie didnt take the kinds of shots that a Ewing/mason/Oakley/smith frontline does a lot to prevent. Lebron does. Id expect him to struggle. Reggie does not. I wouldnt expect him to be off as much as a slasher would.

Starks ran his ass off after him and they had good on the ball guards. Reggie wasnt an on the ball scorer. Shooters could go over the top on the Knicks. Dell Curry had one of his only big scoring games vs them. I remember the Magics shooters doing some things.

Dont talk to me about GOAT defenses as if it means they are designed to shut down the kind of player Reggie was. The east best defenses were designed to stop Michael Jordan. The Bulls defense was led by two people who while great were free to do as they pleased and roam around.

No reason to think Reggie couldnt score on teams that were not designed to stop guys like him. Reggie was hard to guard because he was in a league shifting towards isolation play and preventing penetration off the spaced floors that shooters had started to provide. And in the playoffs he played teams even better at defending players...he didnt play like.

You wanna talk ball talk ball. Dont tell me about GOAT defenses like I dont remember the 90s and their numbers are gonna make me think Greg Anthony was gonna run though Dale Davis unusually well.

[Whoah10115]

Yes. No standout. Im not acting like 23ppg is amazing for a guy who does literally nothing else that justifies getting into an NBA game. Amazing is Jerry West dropping 40ppg the entire playoffs in a finals run. Amazing is Bernard King vs the Pistons. Duncan vs the Lakers in 03. Dirk vs the Thunder.

Again....low standards for a guy who isnt good enough to justify the use of high ones.

Talking to me about 23 and change and nothing else as if a guy like Kevin Durant wouldnt be clowned and called overrated if he played on such a level.



This is complete disregard for the way the Pacers ran their offense and the way he got his points.

[Kblaze8855]

No...it is giving due credit to players better than Reggie Miller who were...because of it...asked to do more. Reggie played the way he did because he was not a clear it out go one on one scorer. Im not grading on a curve because he has less talent than a Durant, Tmac, Jerry West, or whoever. And im not gonna act like 23 a game while losing is amazing for a player who doesnt do anything else.

You give me numbers like its a "Well what say you noooooooow sir?!?!" great point. It isnt. Reggies numbers would be great for Ben Gordon. For a supposed superstar scorer with no other real skills...eh. Straight "eh" status numbers. Reggie was most of the time better than his numbers. But you posted them and then reposted them as if you wanted a response so...there you go.

They just...arent very impressive.