How many players in NBA history were the undisputed best player in the league?

[kizut1659]

I'm a huge bulls fans here so I have all the bias in the world against Kobe but anybody dissing Kobe's greatness during his prime years is smoking crack. The fact that he won nothing means nothing because he played with complete garbage



Kobe that year not only averaged 35 ppg on a team with zero other real offensive options - he did it with solid officiency (35 ppg on 27 shots a game, which is about 1.30 PPS). In 2006 - 2007, he was even more impressive with scoring 31+ on just 23 shots a game (about 1.36 PPS)



Kobe was the best player in the game between 2005-2007 and there should be no doubt about it

As much as I think Heat did not deserve to win 2006 championship, I am not sure Kobe in 2006 was clear-cut better than Wade or Lebron (31-7-7 on 49% vs. 35-5-5 for Kobe on 45%). In 2007, Wade took a step backwards but again, I am not sure Kobe was clear-cut better than LeBron, especially if one takes into account LeBron's playoff performance up to the finals.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Phil got him to focus more though. I don't see any reason why he wouldn't be able to impact the game in a similar way in the same circumstances.

I guess what I'm saying is the ability is there but for other reasons he wasn't quite as impactful.

I agree with that 100%. Though different in the sense that work ethic wasn't a problem for Hakeem, that's kind of similar to how Hakeem's impact went to another level in '93 due to the system and situation. Or Nash in Phoenix for that matter.

What boards where you on? NBAwire and Hoopworld were lit up. People have short memories so they were referencing the last 3 years where Shaq unquestionably had more help, more experience, more time together, and more expectations. Wade was really amusing in that he resembled young MJ even more than Kobe did. There was plenty of discussions going on but no different than now.

Oh, well, more time together, definitely. Wade doing it in his 3rd year was surprising, much like Duncan in his 2nd, or going way back, Kareem and Bird in their 2nd years.

Even so, the Heat weren't unlike the Lakers in that they were a 2 star team with role players and a great coach. Not all that hard for me to see how they won since they had a top 2 player in the entire league in Wade, the best true center(which has added value due to the lack of them) and to add to that, Alonzo Mourning who was without question the best backup center in the league and one of the game's best defensive players period.

Haslem was a good hustle guy and role player, much like the ones LA surrounded Shaq and Kobe with. Antoine Walker was not a guy I was a fan of, but he did turn out to be a good addition. Jason Williams was pretty solid once he toned his game down and GP was a serviceable backup. Not to forget about James Posey either who was a top-notch role player due to his defense and ability to shoot 3s.

Not the most talented finals team by any stretch, but a team that wasn't all Wade, despite Wade having to put them on his back in the finals.

I see a lot parallels between Shaq's first title and Wade's actually, or at least the amount of help(1 star teammate+ role players and proven champion HOF coach) as well as how much of the offense they needed to carry in the finals(38 ppg vs Shaq and 35 for Wade).

As far as the talk at the time. Well, I remember the Wade vs Kobe comparisons and people talking about how well the duos worked with Shaq/Kobe vs Wade/Shaq. I also remember talk of it becoming Wade's team and Shaq stepping aside. Or Wade being the 2nd star of the draft class over Melo who was expected to be Lebron's rival. The usual LBJ vs Wade talk as well. And yeah, some of the "next" Jordan comparison, particularly after the finals.

Wade did play more like Jordan circa '87 than Kobe did, but not more like '90-'98 Jordan.

But yeah, I have no recollection of any sort of significant talk regarding Shaq's help in LA vs Wade's in '06. It's kind of an out of left field comparison and one that isn't made often being star big men and a star guard. To this day, Wade and Shaq are hardly ever compared either on all-time lists or prime vs prime.

Wow, that's a shocker. In your basketball heart you an LA kid tho. Way too much Kareem, Kobe and naming yourself ShaqAttack which is equal to saying Jersey smells better than NY and is a better place to live.

No I'm not, the Lakers have had many great players so as a basketball fan, I usually have an interest in them. Kareem being a perfect example, having an interest in the sport before my time, he was the player who impressed me the most from that era and I love watching him play and discovering his career. I didn't have the luxury of watching him growing up as I was very young when he retired and not even born during his prime.

I wouldn't call Kobe one of my favorite players ever, I do follow him a lot, especially since he played with Shaq so naturally I watched him a lot, as well as the fact that he's been one of the best players on one of the premier teams most of his career in a major media market so those games are on National TV as well as the playoff games, and naturally, I have more of an interest in watching the better teams.

I follow the entire league, not just NY area teams because I love basketball. I've watched the majority of Knick games most years except for when they were painful and the season was lost('06 and '08), part of the reason why I dislike Zach Randolph to this day despite him seeming to turn around his career. I haven't missed a Knick game this year(though I wish I missed tonight's game) and maybe missed a handful at most all last year.

My basketball roots are definitely not LA. Getting into basketball when I did, the Knicks were huge in NY with Ewing, Starks, Oakley, Mason, Harper ect. My first jersey was a John Starks jersey and it seems like I'm one of the only Ewing fans on this board. Later, I really liked Sprewell and Houston. I also watch the Nets when they're halfway decent and occasionally when they're not.

As far as the name? Uh, what exactly does that have to do with anything? As someone who follows the league so much, Shaq is probably my favorite player and the dominant player of the era I identify most with(early 2000s).

I see you going on about Rose all the time as well as Magic. Just means you like their games, has nothing to do with where your "basketball heart" is.

As much as I think Heat did not deserve to win 2006 championship, I am not sure Kobe in 2006 was clear-cut better than Wade or Lebron (31-7-7 on 49% vs. 35-5-5 for Kobe on 45%). In 2007, Wade took a step backwards but again, I am not sure Kobe was clear-cut better than LeBron, especially if one takes into account LeBron's playoff performance up to the finals.

Wade was playing great before his injury in '07. Lebron actually took a step back that year and really had even less of a case over Kobe in '07 than he did in '06. His playoff run wasn't that impressive outside of game 5 vs Detroit.

[Pointguard]

As far as the talk at the time. Well, I remember the Wade vs Kobe comparisons and people talking about how well the duos worked with Shaq/Kobe vs Wade/Shaq. I also remember talk of it becoming Wade's team and Shaq stepping aside. Or Wade being the 2nd star of the draft class over Melo who was expected to be Lebron's rival. The usual LBJ vs Wade talk as well. And yeah, some of the "next" Jordan comparison, particularly after the finals.

Wade did play more like Jordan circa '87 than Kobe did, but not more like '90-'98 Jordan.

But yeah, I have no recollection of any sort of significant talk regarding Shaq's help in LA vs Wade's in '06. It's kind of an out of left field comparison and one that isn't made often being star big men and a star guard. To this day, Wade and Shaq are hardly ever compared either on all-time lists or prime vs prime.

OK, there was a misunderstanding. The comparison was Shaq's help, not Shaq to Wade. Wade was obviously the only guy that could flip that series. This Beta Shaq wasn't the Alpha Shaq that lost to Detroit much less '01 Shaq. People, and you must know that people were just waiting for Kobe to trip up or looking for a way to down him. Another player that resembled Jordan had won it all and in a big way. People do it here with Rose all the time here and he's liked much more than Kobe was at that time. And Rose isn't similar to other players.

No I'm not, the Lakers have had many great players so as a basketball fan, I usually have an interest in them. Kareem being a perfect example, having an interest in the sport before my time, he was the player who impressed me the most from that era and I love watching him play and discovering his career. I didn't have the luxury of watching him growing up as I was very young when he retired and not even born during his prime.

I wouldn't call Kobe one of my favorite players ever, I do follow him a lot, especially since he played with Shaq so naturally I watched him a lot, as well as the fact that he's been one of the best players on one of the premier teams most of his career in a major media market so those games are on National TV as well as the playoff games, and naturally, I have more of an interest in watching the better teams.

I follow the entire league, not just NY area teams because I love basketball. I've watched the majority of Knick games most years except for when they were painful and the season was lost('06 and '08), part of the reason why I dislike Zach Randolph to this day despite him seeming to turn around his career. I haven't missed a Knick game this year(though I wish I missed tonight's game) and maybe missed a handful at most all last year.

My basketball roots are definitely not LA. Getting into basketball when I did, the Knicks were huge in NY with Ewing, Starks, Oakley, Mason, Harper ect. My first jersey was a John Starks jersey and it seems like I'm one of the only Ewing fans on this board. Later, I really liked Sprewell and Houston. I also watch the Nets when they're halfway decent and occasionally when they're not.

As far as the name? Uh, what exactly does that have to do with anything? As someone who follows the league so much, Shaq is probably my favorite player and the dominant player of the era I identify most with(early 2000s).

I see you going on about Rose all the time as well as Magic. Just means you like their games, has nothing to do with where your "basketball heart" is.

Funny I hated Shaq because he used to abuse Ewing and it was personal for him (Now I realize there is a lot personal things with Shaq). My lady, my friends whom Shaq wouldn't pay despite taking merchandise, we just hate him. So my bad on thinking you couldn't be Big Apple and take on a name with Shaq in it. Obviously, I linked guys you hyped together, like 40 years of LA domination - Kareem, Shaq, Kobe. But you play the guitar and grew up in NY theres no need to look at the differences as much. But that was a shocker.

[La Frescobaldi]

OK, there was a misunderstanding. The comparison was Shaq's help, not Shaq to Wade. Wade was obviously the only guy that could flip that series. This Beta Shaq wasn't the Alpha Shaq that lost to Detroit much less '01 Shaq. People, and you must know that people were just waiting for Kobe to trip up or looking for a way to down him. Another player that resembled Jordan had won it all and in a big way. People do it here with Rose all the time here and he's liked much more than Kobe was at that time. And Rose isn't similar to other players.

Funny I hated Shaq because he used to abuse Ewing and it was personal for him (Now I realize there is a lot personal things with Shaq). My lady, my friends whom Shaq wouldn't pay despite taking merchandise, we just hate him. So my bad on thinking you couldn't be Big Apple and take on a name with Shaq on it. Obviously, I linked guys you hyped together, like 40 years of LA domination. But you play the guitar and grew up in NY theres no need to look at the differences as much. But that was a shocker.

********************
I was always a Knicks fan in the 60s and they were horrifical bad. When I got done with school we bought a old Chevelle and took off for California... this was pretty much the time of hippies and we wanted in on it... San Francisco seemed like only one destination in a whole country of destinations.
Well it was a strange thing to get out there and HEY!! Chamberlain is a Laker...!! ...... and then the Knicks became one of the most underrated dynasties in history.
I don't get why people forget the Knicks that ran 70-74 as one of the all-time great teams, but they do, every last time. You never see them on any lists which is pretty disgusting. Yet they will rank the '72 Lakers as one of the 10 best (or whatever) based on Elgin Baylor being on that team!!
lol with his dead-dog loser attitude maybe he should have got MVP that year because they got rid of him and threw a huge celebration by instantly reeling off 33 wins in a row. That was certainly an indisputable fact.

But this indisputable question, it's disputable that any player has ever been indisputable. Does it mean unanimous indisputability? A majority of fans think one guy is indisputaby the best? Or the other players?

I mean 'everybody' thought Jordan was the best player in the league in the 90s. But in fact it was quite disputatious when it was happening. it looked real obvious to a lot of guys (me included) that O'Neal was a far greater force on the court the second half of the decade. He just didn't have as good a team and definitely didn't have Phil Jackson.

Likewise people on these boards have glorified Olajuwon - a great player no question - but he was never really looked at as some all time great center, not until the nostalgia kicked in. Everybody knew he was an awesome center, but there was plenty of dispute about who was best. I have no doubt that Willis Reed & Elvin Hayes would have given Hakeem a lot more trouble than a lot of guys that played in the 90s. I'll get ripped and probably a bad reputation for saying such blasphemy but it's a fact. And those guys were never the indisputables of their day.

To me, these guys were indisputably the best of their day.

* Chamberlain from 66 until he wrecked his knee in '69 (I didn't see him before then so I don't know although I suspect he was better in his athletic prime than he was when he was older),
* Kareem mid-70s,
* Jordan early 90s,
* Shaq for about 4 or 5 years like 96 or 97-2002

If you mean by single season, undoubtedly John Havlicek for 69, Kobe would have one or two....... there's been a lot of guys that had a single great season, where they edged above the rest of the league. But those 4 guys are it really and it is no coincidence they are all centers (except Jordan).

Which makes today's league strategy of no centers very obtuse.

[jlauber]

********************
I was always a Knicks fan in the 60s and they were horrifical bad. When I got done with school we bought a old Chevelle and took off for California... this was pretty much the time of hippies and we wanted in on it... San Francisco seemed like only one destination in a whole country of destinations.
Well it was a strange thing to get out there and HEY!! Chamberlain is a Laker...!! ...... and then the Knicks became one of the most underrated dynasties in history.
I don't get why people forget the Knicks that ran 70-74 as one of the all-time great teams, but they do, every last time. You never see them on any lists which is pretty disgusting. Yet they will rank the '72 Lakers as one of the 10 best (or whatever) based on Elgin Baylor being on that team!!
lol with his dead-dog loser attitude maybe he should have got MVP that year because they got rid of him and threw a huge celebration by instantly reeling off 33 wins in a row. That was certainly an indisputable fact.

But this indisputable question, it's disputable that any player has ever been indisputable. Does it mean unanimous indisputability? A majority of fans think one guy is indisputaby the best? Or the other players?

I mean 'everybody' thought Jordan was the best player in the league in the 90s. But in fact it was quite disputatious when it was happening. it looked real obvious to a lot of guys (me included) that O'Neal was a far greater force on the court the second half of the decade. He just didn't have as good a team and definitely didn't have Phil Jackson.

Likewise people on these boards have glorified Olajuwon - a great player no question - but he was never really looked at as some all time great center, not until the nostalgia kicked in. Everybody knew he was an awesome center, but there was plenty of dispute about who was best. I have no doubt that Willis Reed & Elvin Hayes would have given Hakeem a lot more trouble than a lot of guys that played in the 90s. I'll get ripped and probably a bad reputation for saying such blasphemy but it's a fact. And those guys were never the indisputables of their day.

To me, these guys were indisputably the best of their day.

* Chamberlain from 66 until he wrecked his knee in '69 (I didn't see him before then so I don't know although I suspect he was better in his athletic prime than he was when he was older),
* Kareem mid-70s,
* Jordan early 90s,
* Shaq for about 4 or 5 years like 96 or 97-2002

If you mean by single season, undoubtedly John Havlicek for 69, Kobe would have one or two....... there's been a lot of guys that had a single great season, where they edged above the rest of the league. But those 4 guys are it really and it is no coincidence they are all centers (except Jordan).

Which makes today's league strategy of no centers very obtuse.

I am in agreement with virtually this entire post.

[pauk]

********************
I was always a Knicks fan in the 60s and they were horrifical bad. When I got done with school we bought a old Chevelle and took off for California... this was pretty much the time of hippies and we wanted in on it... San Francisco seemed like only one destination in a whole country of destinations.
Well it was a strange thing to get out there and HEY!! Chamberlain is a Laker...!! ...... and then the Knicks became one of the most underrated dynasties in history.
I don't get why people forget the Knicks that ran 70-74 as one of the all-time great teams, but they do, every last time. You never see them on any lists which is pretty disgusting. Yet they will rank the '72 Lakers as one of the 10 best (or whatever) based on Elgin Baylor being on that team!!
lol with his dead-dog loser attitude maybe he should have got MVP that year because they got rid of him and threw a huge celebration by instantly reeling off 33 wins in a row. That was certainly an indisputable fact.

But this indisputable question, it's disputable that any player has ever been indisputable. Does it mean unanimous indisputability? A majority of fans think one guy is indisputaby the best? Or the other players?

I mean 'everybody' thought Jordan was the best player in the league in the 90s. But in fact it was quite disputatious when it was happening. it looked real obvious to a lot of guys (me included) that O'Neal was a far greater force on the court the second half of the decade. He just didn't have as good a team and definitely didn't have Phil Jackson.

Likewise people on these boards have glorified Olajuwon - a great player no question - but he was never really looked at as some all time great center, not until the nostalgia kicked in. Everybody knew he was an awesome center, but there was plenty of dispute about who was best. I have no doubt that Willis Reed & Elvin Hayes would have given Hakeem a lot more trouble than a lot of guys that played in the 90s. I'll get ripped and probably a bad reputation for saying such blasphemy but it's a fact. And those guys were never the indisputables of their day.

To me, these guys were indisputably the best of their day.

* Chamberlain from 66 until he wrecked his knee in '69 (I didn't see him before then so I don't know although I suspect he was better in his athletic prime than he was when he was older),
* Kareem mid-70s,
* Jordan early 90s,
* Shaq for about 4 or 5 years like 96 or 97-2002

If you mean by single season, undoubtedly John Havlicek for 69, Kobe would have one or two....... there's been a lot of guys that had a single great season, where they edged above the rest of the league. But those 4 guys are it really and it is no coincidence they are all centers (except Jordan).

Which makes today's league strategy of no centers very obtuse.

Wilt Chamberlain was disputable all the time *cough* Russell *cough*... you know... the good ol "but he has no rings" excuse... it shouldnt have been disputable at all... but not winning team accomplishments does that to people... even today... kindof reminds of Lebron today... the most dominant, productive, talented player... but it gets somewhat disputable when he doesnt get this precious team accomplishment...

Kareem i can agree with....

Jordan from 1991-1998 was undisputable....

Shaq from 1999 to 2002 was undisputable...

Overall... JORDAN was the most undisputable ever...

[La Frescobaldi]

Wilt Chamberlain was disputable all the time *cough* Russell *cough*... you know... the good ol "but he has no rings" excuse... it shouldnt have been disputable at all... but not winning team accomplishments does that to people... even today... kindof reminds of Lebron today... the most dominant, productive, talented player... but it gets somewhat disputable when he doesnt get this precious team accomplishment...

Kareem i can agree with....

Jordan from 1991-1998 was undisputable....

Shaq from 1999 to 2002 was undisputable...

Overall... JORDAN was the most undisputable ever...

********************************


Chamberlain utterly destroyed Russell when I saw them. It wasn't close.

In 68 & 69, Russell wasn't even the best player on his own team. Havlicek was, and Sam Jones was right there in 67 & 68.

We can disagree, that's fine, but please read this thread before you do.

http://insidehoops.com//forum/showthread.php?t=245643

You can cough cough all you like - but did you watch them? or just read about it.

[Pointguard]

Wilt Chamberlain was disputable all the time *cough* Russell *cough*... you know... the good ol "but he has no rings" excuse... it shouldnt have been disputable at all... but not winning team accomplishments does that to people... even today... kindof reminds of Lebron today... the most dominant, productive, talented player... but it gets somewhat disputable when he doesnt get this precious team accomplishment...

Kareem i can agree with....

When Kareem was indisputable it was when he wasn't winning. But it was obvious dispite that. Winning is a factor but not the overriding factor. Like I said earlier in this thread. Wilt was flat out dominating Russell in some years with high frequency - six or seven times - and breaking records on Russell in Russell's strong suit. Would you say Ben Wallace was better than Shaq in '05? Winning is a factor when its close but if another player dominates another one, awhole lot, commonsense has to step up. The separation that Wilt had from other players makes the ones that Jordan, Kareem and Shaq had laughable. In fact, you can even take their best year of separation each and add it up cumulatively and it wouldn't be close to what Wilt had scoring wise. Of course they never had much separation rebounding wise but Wilt was dominant there as well.

Could you imagine a center averaging 31 more points and 2 rebounds more than the next center and the other center being considered better? Shaq or Hakeem never averaged 30 points in a season.

[Pointguard]

I think people confuse terms a bit to much. Whe you say player, you are talking about what happens on the 90x45 foot court. Player against player. When you say GOAT you are talking about accolades, rings, accomplishments and such. Best player isn't always the Greatest and the Greatest is not always the Best. Why? Because the greatest is usually loaded with things to do outside of the realm a team player can fully control on the court and off of it.

If OP says undisputed "greatest" at that time, the answer can be different than if he says undisputed "best player." Best baseball player of all time is Albert Pujols. Greatest player might be Babe Ruth. Best football player might have been Jim Brown. Greatest will probably be Tom Brady. Best boxer right now is Floyd (he would demolish Paquio and most people know this). But if they never fought, Pacman would be considered greater because of more fights, covered more weight divsions and was liked better.

Great is usually tied to a lot things out of the control of the player. When you say player you are talking about his game.

[Bernie Nips]

Garnett in 04.

[HurricaneKid]

You just sound like a windbag here. You pretty much just type a bunch of stuff and made no relevant point at all. You sure as hell did not refute anything I posted about Lebron on Rose.




Yeah, Lebron doesn't know how to contest shots or play good to man defense. I already said that, why do you feel like you have the need to say the same thing but in a longer version?

Every Maverick was lighting Lebron up. Shawn Marion was dominating this guy in the post and Jason Terry was pretty much draining every shot over him (at least after he called him out).


Okay.



I am pretty sure I said the same thing that Melo didn't play well outside of Game 1. Melo was torching Ariza until Kobe was put on him. Kobe had far more success defensively than Ariza did on Melo. Then again I am talking to some idiot who thinks win shares is a credible stat.


It's not my fault LeBron doesn't know how to contest and play good man to man defense. Don't shoot the messenger. You are just trying to nitpick and find some ridiculous ways to make excuses for Lebron for his failures on defense or prop up Lebron for his successful defense.


You have had pretty much nothing for me the entire time. I think we are done here since either I have shut down all the points you have made and you have barely made any points at all. Talk to me when you actually have something for me. You had nothing for me even though you tried to cherry pick my post and completely ignore the rest.

Well you are right that we are done here. I expected to find an intelligent conversation about basketball with a guy who's rep bar is at full health. Instead I find a condescending prick who's understanding of advanced basketball strategies is laughably limited. If you are the best this community has I'll take my leave of it.

I never defended LBJ against Dal. Every time I have discussed the series have plastered him for his defense. I have repeatedly said that the evidence of him choking wasn't in the 18/7/7 but in his defense. I'm not some blind hack.

Learn nuance. It will make you a better man.

[StateOfMind12]

I'm not some blind hack.

You pretty much are but yeah I suggest you leave and learn while you are at it.