Elgin Baylor and Rick Barry > Scottie Pippen and John Havlicek

[CavaliersFTW]

Scottie Pippen and John Havlicek have not nor have they ever been in the same tier as players as Elgin Baylor or Rick Barry. Baylor or Barry were the greatest all-around players on the planet at various points of their careers, Players like Pippen and Havlicek were also great all around players but they were never landscape changing leaders in the basketball world. Pippen and Havlicek are Dominique Wilkins/James Worthy class of players in terms of impact which is not an insult to them at all. But it is an insult to Baylor or Barry when people think of Pippen or Havlicek as better players than those two because they see more "rings" or w/e. Nobody in the 1960's, not even in Boston, would tell you Havlicek was a better forward than Baylor nor would they say Havlicek was better than Barry or Erving after Baylor was done. Just like nobody would tell you in the 90's that Pippen equaled or usurped Larry Bird. Baylor and Barry are in the Larry Bird caliber of all-time talents, guys like Pippen and Havlicek are not.

I think the greatest SF's to ever play were

Baylor
Barry
Erving
Bird
Lebron

Durant is still building his stock we'll see where I put him eventually

Guys like Havlicek, English, Wilkins, Worthy, Pippen, Pierce etc are not superior to the guys in the first group. Fans and media were not talking about those guys as the "best players on the planet" yet they were saying those things about the guys in the first group. The guys in the first group were landscape changing players. Just my 2 cents on this. I make this post because I often see people pushing the lower tier guys like Pippen and Havlicek above players like Baylor and Barry, I can only assume they do this because of rings and not because they know anything about the actual players. Based on all the research I've done those guys clearly were not as good, not to a fans eye at the time nor among the eyes of other professionals.

[Roundball_Rock]

Pippen and Havlicek are Dominique Wilkins/James Worthy class of players in terms of impact which is not an insult to them at all.

Worthy made two all-NBA teams--the 3rd team--and was never a MVP candidate. Wilkins could not get past the second round. Wilkins was that era's Carmelo: a great scorer who did not have impact elsewhere and did nothing in the postseason.

Fans and media were not talking about those guys as the "best players on the planet" yet they were saying those things about the guys in the first group.

No, but there was talk about Pippen being the second best player in the league (i.e. Bob Ryan, Sports Illustrated, Chuck Daly--and MJ had Pippen #1 in 95', a view he confirmed privately years later so it was not simply pumping up a colleague).

I do agree with your basic premise, though, that Baylor and Barry were better than Pippen and Hondo. I just think Pippen and Hondo are a cut above Worthy, Wilkins, Pierce.

My tiers of SF's:

First: LeBron, Bird
Second: Dr. J, Baylor
Third: Barry, Hondo, Pippen
Fourth: Pierce, Worthy, Wilkins

Worthy, Pierce and Wilkins were never even the best player at their position. Pippen, Hondo were the best perimeter players in the league in some years and were at a peak level that was higher than those others. They were MVP-caliber; Worthy, Pierce, Wilkins never were. Pippen, Hondo compare to a Durant today; Pierce, Wilkins, Worthy compare to a Carmelo today--perennial all-stars who were never top 5 players in the league or the best at their position.

[Mass Debator]

True. Havlicek had high bball IQ and supernatural endurance but never dominated like Elgin Baylor, one of the most underrated players of all time.

[jongib369]

Scottie Pippen and John Havlicek have not nor have they ever been in the same tier as players as Elgin Baylor or Rick Barry. Baylor or Barry were the greatest all-around players on the planet at various points of their careers, Players like Pippen and Havlicek were also great all around players but they were never landscape changing leaders in the basketball world. Pippen and Havlicek are Dominique Wilkins/James Worthy class of players in terms of impact which is not an insult to them at all. But it is an insult to Baylor or Barry when people think of Pippen or Havlicek as better players than those two because they see more "rings" or w/e. Nobody in the 1960's, not even in Boston, would tell you Havlicek was a better forward than Baylor nor would they say Havlicek was better than Barry or Erving after Baylor was done. Just like nobody would tell you in the 90's that Pippen equaled or usurped Larry Bird. Baylor and Barry are in the Larry Bird caliber of all-time talents, guys like Pippen and Havlicek are not.

I think the greatest SF's to ever play were

Baylor
Barry
Erving
Bird
Lebron

Durant is still building his stock we'll see where I put him eventually

Guys like Havlicek, English, Wilkins, Worthy, Pippen, Pierce etc are not superior to the guys in the first group. Fans and media were not talking about those guys as the "best players on the planet" yet they were saying those things about the guys in the first group. The guys in the first group were landscape changing players. Just my 2 cents on this. I make this post because I often see people pushing the lower tier guys like Pippen and Havlicek above players like Baylor and Barry, I can only assume they do this because of rings and not because they know anything about the actual players. Based on all the research I've done those guys clearly were not as good, not to a fans eye at the time nor among the eyes of other professionals.

What's your reasoning to rank Barry over LeBron and Bird?

[CavaliersFTW]

What's your reasoning to rank Barry over LeBron and Bird?

it's in order of when they played, not a rank order

[kshutts1]

I have not watched enough of Baylor or Barry to really argue, but Pippen definitely did reinvent the sport, and was also arguably a top 3-5 player for a 5 year stretch.

I also consider Baylor more of an undersized 4 than anything. But whatever. I have Pippen and Hondo higher than some.

[CavaliersFTW]

I have not watched enough of Baylor or Barry to really argue, but Pippen definitely did reinvent the sport, and was also arguably a top 3-5 player for a 5 year stretch.

I also consider Baylor more of an undersized 4 than anything. But whatever. I have Pippen and Hondo higher than some.

Pippen didn't reinvent anything, what on earth did he reinvent?

Baylor was definitely a "small" forward, he handled the ball and facilitated as good as any guard, he could effectively play any guard or forward position just like Lebron, but also just like Lebron his bread and butter was the smaller forward spot due to that versatility.

[kshutts1]

... but they were never landscape changing leaders in the basketball world...

That is the quote I was referencing by saying Pippen changed basketball.

Maybe you didn't mean stylistically (as I did) but rather competitively. No matter which way you slice it, Pippen, once Jordan retired the first time, seriously opened some eyes.

Again, this is all relative in that I admittedly didn't watch Baylor or Barry or even Hondo. I'm going by numbers and what little "eye witness accounts" I have seen.
As an example, I say Baylor was an undersized 4 because he averaged 18r in a season. Not because I have seen him play; literally just going by that.

So I'm a misinformed source. I know that, I acknowledge that. I was more "arguing" that Pippen was, in fact, a "landscape changing leader".

[DonDadda59]

14 rangz>1 rang

/Thread.

[moe94]

Who do you rank higher? Karl Malone or Dirk? Serious question, cavs.

[Roundball_Rock]

Pippen didn't reinvent anything, what on earth did he reinvent?

I assume he is referencing Pippen's role in promoting the concept of a "point forward." Yeah, he was not the first point forward but he is the one who brought the concept to prominence and set the stage for Grant Hill, LeBron and others after him.

Pippen definitely did reinvent the sport, and was also arguably a top 3-5 player for a 5 year stretch.

I agree. It is interesting how that seems to have been lost in the mists of time and people assume that he was a Carmelo or Pierce type, a player who spent his prime at the back end of the top 10 and was never among the top tier. The guy was all-NBA first team over prime Malone, prime Barkley and when players like Mullin, Grant Hill, and Wilkins were playing at the same position (MJ himself rated Pippen the best player in the league in 95'--a view he confirmed privately years later--and compared Pippen favorably to Magic and Bird regarding attaining a certain level of greatness). I wonder if 15-20 years from now people will wonder if Dwight Howard or Chris Paul were ever top 3-5 players.

[HurricaneKid]

I wouldn't necessarily put Pipp or Hondo ahead of those guys but I would submit that they were in the same tier as the bottom of your tier. Nique and the rest aren't really in the discussion. They aren't even close.

I'm pretty much in lock step with Roundball.

Elgin continues to be one of the more underrated players ever. I think some people were around for the end of his career and lower him based on that. But at his peak he was tremendous.

People ALWAYS neglect defensive prowess on the all-time rankings (outside of Russell). I think thats why I tend to have Scotty higher than many.

[moe94]

I agree. It is interesting how that seems to have been lost in the mists of time and people assume that he was a Carmelo or Pierce type, a player who spent his prime at the back end of the top 10 and was never among the top tier. The guy was all-NBA first team over prime Malone, prime Barkley and when players like Mullin, Grant Hill, and Wilkins were playing at the same position. I wonder if 15-20 years from now people will wonder if Dwight Howard or Chris Paul were ever top 3-5 players.

I think it has to do with the whole being "second fiddle" thing so much that using his name is synonymous with being the second best player on a team and sidekick.

[Roundball_Rock]

I think it has to do with the whole being "second fiddle" thing so much that using his name is synonymous with being the second best player on a team and sidekick.

Yeah, I think that is a big factor--but it illustrates how flawed the entire "sidekick" concept is. "Sidekick" is a relative thing. Pippen played with the GOAT!!! Of course he was not going to be the best player on the team. That does not change how great he was individually, as he proved in 1994 and 1995 without MJ. If LeBron and Durant play together Durant automatically becomes the "sidekick." Does that mean Durant no longer is the second best player in the league?

People ALWAYS neglect defensive prowess on the all-time rankings (outside of Russell). I think thats why I tend to have Scotty higher than many.

Yeah. If you value defense and winning you will have Pippen and Hondo ranked significantly higher than those who don't weight those two things heavily. The knock against Baylor is he is ringless despite playing with Jerry West and making numberous Finals. If he won a ring he would be comparable to Hakeem.

Scoring does tend to be overvalued. If player A is putting up 20/9/6 and playing dominant defense and player B is posting 25/9/6 and is a defensive liability (think James Harden) who is having a greater impact on the game?

[CavaliersFTW]

That is the quote I was referencing by saying Pippen changed basketball.

Maybe you didn't mean stylistically (as I did) but rather competitively. No matter which way you slice it, Pippen, once Jordan retired the first time, seriously opened some eyes.

Again, this is all relative in that I admittedly didn't watch Baylor or Barry or even Hondo. I'm going by numbers and what little "eye witness accounts" I have seen.
As an example, I say Baylor was an undersized 4 because he averaged 18r in a season. Not because I have seen him play; literally just going by that.

So I'm a misinformed source. I know that, I acknowledge that. I was more "arguing" that Pippen was, in fact, a "landscape changing leader".

I see your point now okay. I have put together quite a bit of testimonial and archive footage of Baylor, this can at least give an idea what he looked like playing and what many coaches and peers thought of him when he played: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjNS_oYE92E

His rebounding was superb, that was one of his biggest strengths, but he definitely handled the ball and played like a small forward. He and Larry Bird have similar TRB%'s, with Baylor peaking slightly higher and Bird having a more steady level of rebounding excellence over the course of his career - by the time they retired their career TRB%'s are about the same, and about as good as any small forwards that have ever played. That doesn't necessarily pigeon hole them as PF's though, it just means they were abnormally great rebounding SF's

I've seen and listened too at least as much footage and testimonial of Havlicek and Barry, though I haven't put anything together for them yet. That's how I came up with my opinion.