1 year later: 100 Greatest Players of All-Time According to ISH

[dhenk]

If anything, Kobe has to move down.
The MVP is a useless accomplishment if you can

[TheAnswer]

Iverson>Drexler

[w00terz]

KJ too low

GP about right

AI too high


Obviously Ray, KG, and Pierce could get some boosts

AI is a better player than GP you freaking douche bag.

[D-Fence]

But it's not about who would be the best today or who would make a team in 2008, it's what they did in their time.

It's kind of like the Beatles or Sly and the Family Stone. Would those bands be top selling artist in 2008, no because that's not what is popular now, but are they still great, of course.

We did count era's against players. That was talked about quite a bit. And, if we didn't--if all eras were considered equal, Mikan would be considered the GOAT, or at least top 5; instead, he was #18, and that was even argued. Joe Fulks was the best player in the league for 2 seasons, within the top 2 for another, would've been a 2-time MVP, 2-time Finals MVP, and was a 2-time scoring champ, and a champion and he's at #87. The old-time players were also greatly penalized because many didn't know who they were.

The only player who you could say had no real comp is George Mikan. His biggest comp were centers Clyde Lovellete and Neil Johnston, not really household names but HOF'ers. Even the other great earlier players had comp at their position, but he was really the only one at center.

Eh, 7 other players on the list played against Mikan. Center Ed Macauley was getting some support near the end of the list, too. One thing that seems to be forgotten is that Mikan did have some quality teammates; he didn't win championships by himself. Jim Pollard should've made this list. Vern Mikkelsen had a case, too. Slater Martin is in the Hall of Fame. Lovellette was Mikan's teammate (not opponent), and he made for a very good big off the bench to begin his career. For Mikan's pre-Lakers NBL title, he played with Bobby McDermont, a Hall of Famer. Not playing with a shot clock--the way basketball was played back then is probably just not easy for many to appreciate. Anyhow, going from top 5 to #18 is a significant era penalty, especially if you consider his influence on the game, his status as a pioneer worth anything. Ask Bill Russell who inspired him.

OK, a year ago the greatest threads in ISH history was started. We went through 100 plus days figuring out who were the best. Now a years later, looking back at the list, what would y'all change? Which legend is too high or too low, which current player moved up and which current player was too high to begin with?

I don't agree with this list from top to bottom. That's not too important, though. It wasn't an easy list to make. Regardless, there are some really bad placements. Not even getting into crossing eras, there are some questionable placements. Erving is over Moses even though he was second to Moses when they were on the same team. Baylor shouldn't be over Pettit. Bill Sharman was not better than Paul Arizin and Neil Johnston. With fewer participants near the end of the list, the list became more misplaced, too. I don't think Penny Hardaway or Tom Chambers are within the 100, to just name two. And, as already mentioned, current players would climb the list (Garnett was too low anyhow). I guess we'd have to make room for LeBron James and Dwyane Wade, too.

[mlh1981]

Something to consider..........

Players from the "old days" didn't have any of the advantages that today's athletes enjoy. They flew on regular commercial planes, didn't have the same nutrition/workout technological advances that many of today athletes have, and many had offseason jobs, so they weren't able to concentrate as heavily on the game 24/7/365 as todays greats do.

[Nevaeh]

[QUOTE=dhenk]If anything, Kobe has to move down.
The MVP is a useless accomplishment if you can

[daballa13]

Iverson deserves to be higher than Ewing IMO

[brwnman]

BS. Where is Milt Palacio? You can't hold it against him that the backboard is too hard. He plays in a strong backboard era, if he didn't, all of his layup attempts would go in, this is just too much hatred against him...

[Nets fan 93]

LOL I dont know why but I just started cracking up when I saw Big Ben on the list

[sick_brah07]

i had a big ass arguement with some idiot who tried to convince me cousy was better then kobe, there should be a list for 100 most skillful players and another 100 for players that acomplished the most

[EvinWizzle]

Iverson too low

[VCMVP1551]

My top 20.

1.Michael Jordan
2.Magic Johnson
3.Shaquille O'Neal
4.Kareem Abdul Jabbar
5.Wilt Chamberlain
6.Hakeem Olajuwon
7.Bill Russell
8.Larry Bird
9.Tim Duncan
10.Jerry West
11.Isiah Thomas
12.Scottie Pippen
13.Moses Malone
14.John Havlicek
15.Kobe Bryant
16.Kevin Garnett
17.Charles Barkley
18.Oscar Robertson
19.Karl Malone
20.Julius Erving

[Koop1]

Ben ****ing wallace is on this list
be ****ing wallace
BEN WALLACE IS ON THIS ****ING LIST
this is a jokee
I expect to see Gilbert on it at the end of next year when he starts torching niggasss again

[Koop1]

im not a kobe fan
but personally i feel , kobe Bryant is 93489054894398048905895 X better than ****ing larry Bird
Larry Bird over kobe bryant
LOLLLLLLL

[Junny]

Something to consider..........

Players from the "old days" didn't have any of the advantages that today's athletes enjoy. They flew on regular commercial planes, didn't have the same nutrition/workout technological advances that many of today athletes have, and many had offseason jobs, so they weren't able to concentrate as heavily on the game 24/7/365 as todays greats do.

I agree. Stripping a great player of his status "because he played in a weak era" is just wrong. Things were different back then. Every phucking single era is going to be different. Just ease up and accept people's achievements.