ISH's #19 Player of Alltime

[ShaqAttack3234]

Do you consider LeBron vs. Wade to be close on an all-time level if both of there careers stopped now?

Pretty close, yeah. Lebron has more ability, but aside from 2009, Wade has been a more impressive playoff performer, even from early in his career. I remember being really impressed with him in the '05 playoffs and started thinking he might be different from most of the other star perimeter players, and the way he followed that up in '06 puts him in elite company, imo, as well as his 2009 season which was amazing from an individual standpoint and his best season as far as I'm concerned, though the 2006 finals/ECF were legendary performances themselves.

I'd still give Lebron the edge based on the fact that I think his peak is better and he's been better more years since they've been in the league. I trust Wade more to play up to his level or raise his game in the playoffs, but I think that Lebron is significantly more capable of carrying a mediocre team, or making teams contenders that most players couldn't.

For a year to year breakdown, I'd go like this.

2004- Lebron(but tough to compare considering they were in different situations)
2005- Wade
2006- Wade
2007- Lebron(but Wade was better before his injury)
2008- Lebron(Wade was pretty much irrelevant this season due to injuries)
2009- Lebron
2010- Lebron
2011- Lebron(but the disappearing act in the finals makes me unsure)

Some of those years are pretty close such as the ones where I felt that I couldn't just list Lebron without saying something for Wade. They were pretty close in '09 and '10, Wade's skill set as an individual player was right there in '09, but didn't have the full season/playoffs that Lebron did, while Wade started the regular season off lazier in 2010, but Lebron's odd final 3 games vs Boston at least make you start looking more at the mental aspects, though it's not enough in a season when Wade lost in the first round and clearly didn't play as well for the entire season. 2011 becomes even harder because Lebron was clearly better in my mind throughout the regular season, and through the first 3 rounds of the playoffs had played better overall, but Wade ended up with the better overall playoff run, and again, hasn't given any reason to question his mental ability.

Interesting question, and when I think about it, I can see the case for Wade.

[RobertdeMeijer]

I also think the four almost great power forwards (Malone, Barkley, Garnett, Nowittzki) are ranked a bit high. But it's not a big difference from what I believe is right (they should be around players like Isiah, Stockton, Pettit and Baylor, which they are)

[Deuce Bigalow]

17 - David Robinson
7 - Lebron James
5 - Elgin Baylor
4 - Isiah Thomas
3 - George Mikan
2 - Bob Pettit
2 - John Havlicek
1 - Dwyane Wade

Total - 41 votes

[DaPerceive]

17 - David Robinson
7 - Lebron James
5 - Elgin Baylor
4 - Isiah Thomas
3 - George Mikan
2 - Bob Pettit
2 - John Havlicek
1 - Dwyane Wade

Total - 41 votes

Time for #20 brah.

[Legends66NBA7]

Time for #20 brah.

I responded in the T-Mac thread about why he hasn't made it out of the first round, incase you wanted to know.

[D-Wade316]

No, we all know your agenda
Mikan is not better than Kobe, Bird, and Hakeem

Yeah. It is an agenda putting Mikan, who was far more successful, than Kobe, Hakeem, Bird.

[D-Wade316]

The thing I consider most when it comes to greatness in a sport is how good they are at it followed by their sucess. Not how they "dominated their era" no matter how much weaker it is. OR how they revolutionized the sport. Just because you did something first and "layed the groundwork down" it doesnt make you a better player. The thing is you put him against 3rd tier centers like alonzo mourning, pat ewing he gets destroyed. If you consider russell and wilt's accomplishments kinda shaky due to 8 teams and what not Mikan's era is probably worse. Not taking away from the accomplishments but its truly the case. Mikan does not belong in the top 10. Hes not even a top 5 center. And dont bring the Modern technology/training bs into the argument they played in that era and another player played in another era there are no ifs and maybes.

You simply don't understand the value of "groundwork". I'll give you an analogy.

Alexander the Great is widely considered the greatest military commander of all-time. During his conquest, he never lost a single battle due to his superior intellect. Now lets take one general in the modern era. Lets say Patton. If we put them in a head-to-head battle, Patton would beat Alexander and his spears & sticks men. That's not even debatable, because of the innovations since Alexander's time.

Now we put Alexander in Patton's shoes. Alexander and his 3rd army would have stomped the Germans, much more than what Patton would have done. Why? Because Alexander possessed a much greater intellect than Patton. He was greatly ahead of his time, and he utilized his army's full potential.

The same goes for Mikan. While Mikan, isn't as skilled as some big man today, we must value what he did in his era. Dominating the 50s during his time, was just as difficult as Wilt dominating the 60s. Why? Because no one had the abilities to do so than both of them.

You get my point?

[JMT]

Ugh....

Great response if it in any way reflected your original post.

More players/popularity doesn't equal better players or talent.

[Fazotronic]

Great response if it in any way reflected your original post.

More players/popularity doesn't equal better players or talent.

of course it does.

how are talented players gona play basketball if they don't know about it.

[JMT]

how are talented players gona play basketball if they don't know about it.

More does not equal better. Simply having additional large bodies to draw from doesn't result in better play or players.

[MichaelCheazley]

You simply don't understand the value of "groundwork". I'll give you an analogy.

Alexander the Great is widely considered the greatest military commander of all-time. During his conquest, he never lost a single battle due to his superior intellect. Now lets take one general in the modern era. Lets say Patton. If we put them in a head-to-head battle, Patton would beat Alexander and his spears & sticks men. That's not even debatable, because of the innovations since Alexander's time.

Now we put Alexander in Patton's shoes. Alexander and his 3rd army would have stomped the Germans, much more than what Patton would have done. Why? Because Alexander possessed a much greater intellect than Patton. He was greatly ahead of his time, and he utilized his army's full potential.

The same goes for Mikan. While Mikan, isn't as skilled as some big man today, we must value what he did in his era. Dominating the 50s during his time, was just as difficult as Wilt dominating the 60s. Why? Because no one had the abilities to do so than both of them.

You get my point?

Apples and oranges