Top 10 Players All Time

[L.Kizzle]

I've covered this many times. Here are some posts I made about Oscar recently.






Can't see a valid argument for Oscar being top 10.

It's not Oscars fault they played in the pace they played in. You can't give him a negative for that.

And he had a few good teammates , Lucas being the best. Embry may have been an All-Star but he wasn't on the level as the other top centers in the league at the time (Russ, Wilt, Reed, Bellamy), no where close a matter of fact. He'd be Kevin Duckworth in the 90s with Hakeem, Pat, Ewing, Shaq, ect.

Twyman is a good swing player for a few of O's early seasons and Lucas later in the decade. Smith was an All-Star that season cause the game was being held in Cinnci. He never sniffed anything close to an All-Star appearance before or after again.

[ShaqAttack3234]

It's not Oscars fault they played in the pace they played in. You can't give him a negative for that.

But you can't just compare his numbers to players who played with 30-35 fewer possessions available without mentioning that.

[L.Kizzle]

But you can't just compare his numbers to players who played with 30-35 fewer possessions available without mentioning that.

There are not fewer possessions available because there isn't a set number of possessions per game. The only thing set is the shot clock at 24 seconds and 12 minute quarters. They had the same time in 1956, the same time in 1963, the same in 1977, the same in 1991, the same in 2009.

It's not like the pre-shot clock era. This current era takes a few more seconds to set up, that's all the difference is. I bet if someone does the calculations, the difference is about 2 seconds.

[ShaqAttack3234]

There are not fewer possessions available because there isn't a set number of possessions per game. The only thing set is the shot clock at 24 seconds and 12 minute quarters. They had the same time in 1956, the same time in 1963, the same in 1977, the same in 1991, the same in 2009.

It's not like the pre-shot clock era. This current era takes a few more seconds to set up, that's all the difference is. I bet if someone does the calculations, the difference is about 2 seconds.

Come on, do you think it's a coincidence that every 20+ rpg season came in the 70's? Do you think it's a coincidence that nobody has attempted over 30 shots per game since then? The league played at a MUCH faster pace and that makes it impossible to just compare numbers. Is 30/12/11 on a team that averages 125 possessions more impressive than 35/5/5 on a team that averages 90?

[Big#50]

KAJ
Duncan
SHAQ
MJ
Bird
Hakeem
Magic
Wilt
Russell
Kobe

[jlauber]

Come on, do you think it's a coincidence that every 20+ rpg season came in the 70's? Do you think it's a coincidence that nobody has attempted over 30 shots per game since then? The league played at a MUCH faster pace and that makes it impossible to just compare numbers. Is 30/12/11 on a team that averages 125 possessions more impressive than 35/5/5 on a team that averages 90?

In Oscar's 61-62 season, the NBA averaged 118.8 ppg. In Kobe's 05-06 season, the NBA averaged 97 ppg...or at about 82% of '62. Assists were at 88% of Oscar's '62 season in '06. And rebounds were at about 67% (after deducting TEAM rebounds.) BUT, Kobe too 27 FGAs per game in '06, while Oscar only took 23 in '62. So, does any intelligent poster believe that Oscar could not have taken more shots in '06 than he did in '62. In fact, Kobe in 06, and MJ in '87, took a higher percentage of their team's FGAs, per minute played, than Chamberlain did in his '62 season.

Not only that, but Oscar shot .478 in a league that shot .426. Kobe not only shot .450 in a league that shot .454, he had an eFG% of .491 in a league that shot .490. Using those numbers and Oscar's FG% would have sky-rocketed in '06.

So, we can safely assume that Oscar's assists would only have dropped from 11.4 apg down to about 10 apg in '06. His rebounds would have dropped to about 8.3. But, there is simply no way in hell that he would have only scored 24.4 ppg in '06. IMHO, he would have been even more ball dominant in '06, and could easily have taken MORE shots in '06...AND, at a MUCH higher FG%.

30-8-10 would have EASILY been within reason for Oscar in '06. And a GUNNING Oscar could EASILY have averaged 35-8-7 in '06.

[ShaqAttack3234]

In Oscar's 61-62 season, the NBA averaged 118.8 ppg. In Kobe's 05-06 season, the NBA averaged 97 ppg...or at about 82% of '62. Assists were at 88% of Oscar's '62 season in '06. And rebounds were at about 67% (after deducting TEAM rebounds.) BUT, Kobe too 27 FGAs per game in '06, while Oscar only took 23 in '62. So, does any intelligent poster believe that Oscar could not have taken more shots in '06 than he did in '62. In fact, Kobe in 06, and MJ in '87, took a higher percentage of their team's FGAs, per minute played, than Chamberlain did in his '62 season.

Not only that, but Oscar shot .478 in a league that shot .426. Kobe not only shot .450 in a league that shot .454, he had an eFG% of .491 in a league that shot .490. Using those numbers and Oscar's FG% would have sky-rocketed in '06.

So, we can safely assume that Oscar's assists would only have dropped from 11.4 apg down to about 10 apg in '06. His rebounds would have dropped to about 8.3. But, there is simply no way in hell that he would have only scored 24.4 ppg in '06. IMHO, he would have been even more ball dominant in '06, and could easily have taken MORE shots in '06...AND, at a MUCH higher FG%.

Oh my god, you're killing me.

30-8-10 would have EASILY been within reason for Oscar in '06. And a GUNNING Oscar could EASILY have averaged 35-8-7 in '06.

Just when I think you couldn't top yourself with stupid shit. You're the same guy who supposedly watched Oscar and didn't think he'd even be an all-star today just a few years ago.

[jlauber]

Oh my god, you're killing me.



Just when I think you couldn't top yourself with stupid shit. You're the same guy who supposedly watched Oscar and didn't think he'd even be an all-star today just a few years ago.

And YOU are the same IDIOT who ranked Wilt at #10, and WELL below Bird and Hakeem, whose careers PALE in comparison to Chamberlain's. There is simply NO argument that would either of those two anywhere NEAR Wilt's career or IMPACT on the game.

As for Oscar, you always use PACE, and NEVER take LEAGUE AVERAGE FG% in account. I suspect that you would also argue that pitching was much better in the "dead ball" era, than in any other year.

I have DESTROYED the RIDICULOUS "pace" argument here a dozen times.

[perrin_07]

i dont even see how shaq would be a top 10 player anyhow. i would rate olajuwon/d.robinson/kareem well b4 shaq. shaq didnt have that great skill,ewing was better if his knees were healthy =/

[ShaqAttack3234]

And YOU are the same IDIOT who ranked Wilt at #10, and WELL below Bird and Hakeem, whose careers PALE in comparison to Chamberlain's. There is simply NO argument that would either of those two anywhere NEAR Wilt's career or IMPACT on the game.

As for Oscar, you always use PACE, and NEVER take LEAGUE AVERAGE FG% in account. I suspect that you would also argue that pitching was much better in the "dead ball" era, than in any other year.

I have DESTROYED the RIDICULOUS "pace" argument here a dozen times.

The only thing you've destroyed is your breath with all of the shit that comes out of your mouth. And yes, Wilt is almost as overrated as Oscar, both of their legacies rely heavily on inflated stats, and luckily for them, not many actually take the time to really look into their careers.

Of course I don't use league average FG%, because defense is much better now regardless, something you also agreed with just a few years ago, funny how someone who claims to have watched the era will change their opinion so much. It's no mystery though, you started feeling insecure about Wilt's legacy.

[Mark Madsen]

1. Michael Jordan
2. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
3. Wilt Chamberlain
4. Larry Bird
5. Hakeem Olajuwon
6. Shaquille O'Neal
7. Magic Johnson
8. Bill Russell
9. Tim Duncan
10. Jerry West

[whoartthou]

1. Michael Jordan
2. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
3. Wilt Chamberlain
4. Larry Bird
5. Hakeem Olajuwon
6. Shaquille O'Neal
7. Magic Johnson
8. Bill Russell
9. Tim Duncan
10. Jerry West

look man, i know kobe is overrated as all hell, but you gotta give him the numero 10 ranking !

[ballerz]

1. Michael Jordan
2. Bill Russell
3. Kareem Abdul Jabbar
4. Magic Johnson
5. Larry Bird
6. Wilt Chamberlain
7. Tim Duncan
8. Shaquille O'Neal
9. Kobe Bryant
10. Hakeem Olujawon

[magnax1]

The only thing you've destroyed is your breath with all of the shit that comes out of your mouth. And yes, Wilt is almost as overrated as Oscar, both of their legacies rely heavily on inflated stats, and luckily for them, not many actually take the time to really look into their careers.

Of course I don't use league average FG%, because defense is much better now regardless, something you also agreed with just a few years ago, funny how someone who claims to have watched the era will change their opinion so much. It's no mystery though, you started feeling insecure about Wilt's legacy.

You can't discount players from the 60's because of their inflated stats. I think you've gone a bit too far in compensating for the era they played in. I get where you're coming from, but I don't think it's exactly fair.

[Mark Madsen]

1. Michael Jordan
2. Bill Russell
3. Kareem Abdul Jabbar
4. Magic Johnson
5. Larry Bird
6. Wilt Chamberlain
7. Tim Duncan
8. Shaquille O'Neal
9. Kobe Bryant
10. Hakeem Olujawon