Underrated Postseason Performance - 1986 Kevin McHale

[Shep]

Drexler wasn't the impact player Ewing was, and Stockton is an incredibly stupid choice over Ewing. Talk about the playoffs, John came up small again, especially compared to Ewing.

drexler definately had more of an impact on the blazers, leading them to the best record in the western conference, and the nba finals.

stockton? easy choice over ewing. stockton was his teams best player, although malone played better than stockton in the playoffs, stockton was still the jazz' best player due to his spectacular regular season in which he was top 3 most valuable.

This was before Hakeem went to another level, and in particular, he had a subpar '92 season, so Ewing over Hakeem isn't a tough choice this year.

although hakeem did not make the playoffs, ewing did not do anything in the playoffs to increase his rank over olajuwon. ewing decreased his points, rebounds, steals, blocks, all in more minutes per game, ewing also decreased his field goal percentage by more than 6 percentage points, and had to take 20 shots to get his 23 points, a disgusting line for a center.

There were 3 players with a legit case over Ewing and they were Jordan(the only one I'm sure was actually better), Malone and Robinson. Robinson may have been ranked higher, but I preferred Ewing's offensive game and leadership and Robinson missing the playoffs right now is the deciding factor for me, but I'm not sure whether I'll change my mind and rank Robinson higher.

malone wasn't better than ewing. jordan, pippen, robinson, drexler, olajuwon, and stockton were.

Thought so, you're just drooling over the triple double stats, and the steal numbers which really don't mean much, especially comparing him to a guy who got 3 blocks per game and was a much better defensive player.

better than drooling over ppg stats

Frustrating to give detailed breakdowns of their games and for it to just go right over your head and you respond with this trash.

sorry to disappoint you. actually i thought you would respond after my first post and acknowledge my rankings, and then change your rankings to suit mine.

I'll give the simplified version with the following facts. Kareem was a much better scorer, a much better clutch player, a much better defensive player and a much better half court player. No argument against that.

magic was much better at making teammates better, running sets, creating scoring opportunities, and running a team. he also contributed more, had no weaknesses to his game, was finals mvp, stepped up more when it counted, and was just flat out better. easy choice here, no contest.

[ShaqAttack3234]

yes, he was only slightly better in the playoffs. the difference between rose and the next best player on the bulls roster was the biggest in the league, except for dwight howard in orlando

I don't care what the difference between 1st and 2nd best player is when that Bulls team is the best defensive team and outrebounded opponents by a stunning 5.7 rpg. I expect Rose to win a lot of games with that support.

By the way, remember your comment about Howard because once you consider Howard made his team an elite defense while Rose was backed by one and you'll see how ridiculous comparing them based on team success is.

rose was busy shooting 35% in one series, meanwhile dirk nowitzki was busy grabbing only 8 rebounds per contest, and dishing only 2 and a half assists, along with barely over a steal or a block per game.

Dirk wasn't a great defender and rebounder, but he was solid, not bad, however, he was a phenomenal offensive player. Rose was pretty much exclusively an offensive player himself, and I'd much rather have an extremely efficient guy like Dirk who was a monster in the clutch and fit into an offense, than Rose who was inefficient at 39.6% for the entire playoffs, excessively ball-dominant and disappeared in the clutch shooting just 21.4% and averaging just 4.4 ppg in 4th quarters and the game 4 OT while shooting.

the only reason the mavs won a championship was because lebron james didn't play to his usual level, or the level he displayed against the bulls in the conference finals. this had zero to do with dirk nowitzki, who was the worst defender in dallas' starting 5.

So how about the Mavs victories over very talented Laker and Thunder teams? Series that Dirk dominated. And aren't you the one always preaching against hypotheticals?

rose had an outstanding first 2 rounds, and played beyond what nowitzki was capable of at that point.

rose will not be blamed for chicago not making the nba finals, due to him giving his all, and putting it all on the line. other guys that were contributers during the regular season were non factors in the playoffs. key guys off the bench like ronnie brewer and cj watson did nothing, then there was carlos boozer who was the teams 3rd best player in the regular season and went from 18/10/3 on 51% from the field to a disgusting 13/10/2 on 43%.

His team gave him a chance to win vs Miami. As bad as Rose was, his team was still competitive, makes you wonder. I mentioned how bad Rose was late in games, and all of their losses were up for grabs in the 4th. Game 2 was tied with less than 5 minutes remaining, Game 3 was a 2 point game at one point in the 4th, game 4 went to overtime and the Bulls led by 12 in game 5 with about 3 minutes remaining.

how far did this new found footwork skills and realisation that there was a backboard behind the hoop get his team, the orlando magic though?

As far as you could expect with Howard expected to carry so much of the offense(only other player who averaged even 15 was Carter for just his 22 games with the team), while being almost soley responsible for Orlando having a top 3 defense.

Out of Dwight's 8 teammates who played 15 or more mpg, only 3 shot at least 40%, and only 2 averaged double figures(Nelson at 13.2 ppg, Jason Richardson at 10 ppg) while Dwight averaged 27 ppg, 15.5 rpg, 1.8 bpg on 63 FG%.

You really expect Dwight to win that series with that type of support?

iverson's skillset was much more effective for his team. duncan's team was swept by that lakers team and duncan played disgustingly poor in that series, not that it even matters. the team actually won with allen iverson leading them to victory, and their defensive schemes were a contribution of every player on the floor, but offensively it was largely iverson doing everything. attempting 30 field goals was required for the sixers to have the best chance to win.

at Iverson's skill set being much more effective for his team. Duncan's defense was a big reason the Spurs had an elite defense, and he was easily his team's best and most important offensive player. Iverson's team won on defense and rebounding, and he wasn't great at either.

Congratulations, the Sixers won 1 more game vs the Lakers, that must mean Iverson is better, right?

Iverson was a great scorer, but you brought up stats which is why I brought up the 30 FGA. 33 ppg on 30 FGA is nothing amazing so you should really stay away from numbers on this one.

the whole season is in mind when choosing who the best player, and the playoffs. the playoff's proved iverson was the third best player in the league, only behind o'neal and bryant.

5th best clearly behind Shaq, Duncan and Kobe, and also behind Garnett.

i have demolished all your arguments you have ever put up regarding anyone besides shaquille o'neal being better than kobe bryant in 2000.

Not in your wildest delusion.

payton was better than the aforementioned webber, malone, and ofcourse hill, but was still 6th - 4 spots behind bryant. kidd wasn't even better than robinson.

olajuwon embarrassed himself in the whole playoffs, and was swept in the second round.

Hakeem played quite well vs the Lakers.

o'neal had a positive playoff run. he made the conference finals, and despite losing to the eventual champion bulls, still put up 27/11/4 on 64% from the field.

His playoff run was more good than bad, but he didn't dominate the Bulls and shot under 40% from the line.

robinson had a negative playoff run, but nowhere near olajuwon's, whos series against seattle was pure filth. he averaged 30/12/3/1/3 on 56% from the field in the first round win over charles barkley, kevin johnson, and the phoenix suns.

That Suns team was about as bad of a defensive as you can see in the playoffs, 7th worst in the league, and their interior defense in particular was very weak, so forgive me if I don't alter my rankings because he dominated that team.

Robinson's series vs Utah was clearly worse than Hakeem's vs Seattle, and more importantly, Hakeem was still simply a better player.

the very importand facet of winning games, and making your teammates appear much better than they would be if you weren't there. robinson was also a much better rebounder, defender, and alot better at taking care of the ball. i will also take robinson's offensive game at this point.

Hakeem had a greater impact on his teammates, it's pretty clear when watching how Houston's offense operated. at Robinson being a "much" better defender and rebounder, and taking Robinson over Hakeem offensively.

pippen stepped up and led the bulls in the playoffs with michael jordan playing uncharacteristically human like.

Your delusions have returned.

if you had seen any of those games you will understand how many ways pippen could impact on a game, besides scoring the basketball.

I'm well aware of that, he still had a poor series, it was well documented.

if mcdaniel was considered a disappointment it was only due to the fact that he was in a new system, and a system where he could no longer get the ball when he wanted because ewing was the focal point, and a very poor passer.

Some of this is true, except Ewing's passing was fine at this point.

drexler definately had more of an impact on the blazers, leading them to the best record in the western conference, and the nba finals.

Because that team was loaded. Ewing's defensive impact is too much for Drexler to overcome especially since Ewing was a better half court scorer than Drexler making their offense much closer than their defense.

stockton? easy choice over ewing. stockton was his teams best player, although malone played better than stockton in the playoffs, stockton was still the jazz' best player due to his spectacular regular season in which he was top 3 most valuable.

There was not one season that both Stockton and Ewing were in the league when Stockton was the better player from '89-'97.

although hakeem did not make the playoffs, ewing did not do anything in the playoffs to increase his rank over olajuwon. ewing decreased his points, rebounds, steals, blocks, all in more minutes per game, ewing also decreased his field goal percentage by more than 6 percentage points, and had to take 20 shots to get his 23 points, a disgusting line for a center.

Ewing was excellent in both of his playoff series, and he had a better regular season than Hakeem on top of it.

better than drooling over ppg stats

You keep sticking to that line, anyone else who sees this thread and my posts will see how ridiculous and unsubstantiated it is.

magic was much better at making teammates better, running sets, creating scoring opportunities, and running a team. he also contributed more, had no weaknesses to his game, was finals mvp, stepped up more when it counted, and was just flat out better. easy choice here, no contest.

So in other words, Magic was better at being a point guard than Kareem? I guess Norm Nixon was better than Kareem too. Magic did have weaknesses. Outside shooting, half court skill set and defense. Kareem's weaknesses were barely weaknesses and far more minimal.

[Shep]

I don't care what the difference between 1st and 2nd best player is when that Bulls team is the best defensive team and outrebounded opponents by a stunning 5.7 rpg. I expect Rose to win a lot of games with that support.

By the way, remember your comment about Howard because once you consider Howard made his team an elite defense while Rose was backed by one and you'll see how ridiculous comparing them based on team success is.

lol. rose was voted league mvp for a reason. that reason was because he was the most valuable player (or second most valuable in this case) to his teams success, in the entire league.

Dirk wasn't a great defender and rebounder, but he was solid, not bad, however, he was a phenomenal offensive player. Rose was pretty much exclusively an offensive player himself, and I'd much rather have an extremely efficient guy like Dirk who was a monster in the clutch and fit into an offense, than Rose who was inefficient at 39.6% for the entire playoffs, excessively ball-dominant and disappeared in the clutch shooting just 21.4% and averaging just 4.4 ppg in 4th quarters and the game 4 OT while shooting.

where are you getting this trash from? rose was much more clutch all season long. i would rather have nowitzki in the playoffs that particular season anyway, as i have stated he slightly outplayed rose. but in the regular season the difference was just far, far too much to overcome.

So how about the Mavs victories over very talented Laker and Thunder teams? Series that Dirk dominated. And aren't you the one always preaching against hypotheticals?

who is talking about hypotheticals? i'm talking about facts. nowitzki didn't dominate anything or anyone in the playoffs. 25/9 against the lakers? good, but not great. less than 6 rebounds per game and over 4 turnovers per game against the thunder? not good at all. jason kidd was the best player in the oklahoma series.

His team gave him a chance to win vs Miami. As bad as Rose was, his team was still competitive, makes you wonder. I mentioned how bad Rose was late in games, and all of their losses were up for grabs in the 4th. Game 2 was tied with less than 5 minutes remaining, Game 3 was a 2 point game at one point in the 4th, game 4 went to overtime and the Bulls led by 12 in game 5 with about 3 minutes remaining.

rose put the bulls in those positions to win games.
there was also a number of times when rose led the bulls like a league mvp leads his teams including game 1 vs the pacers coming up huge in the fourth quarter to lead the bulls back from being behind by 10 points, finishing with 39 points. game 2 vs the pacers, scoring 8 points over the final 4 minutes of regulation en route to a 36 point night. game 3 vs the pacers, coming up huge again in the final stages, making a go ahead layup inside 20 seconds. playing a massive part in the bulls taking over game 5 in chicago. i could go on, but seriously, how many games did you actually watch? or are you just going by popular notion?

As far as you could expect with Howard expected to carry so much of the offense(only other player who averaged even 15 was Carter for just his 22 games with the team), while being almost soley responsible for Orlando having a top 3 defense.

Out of Dwight's 8 teammates who played 15 or more mpg, only 3 shot at least 40%, and only 2 averaged double figures(Nelson at 13.2 ppg, Jason Richardson at 10 ppg) while Dwight averaged 27 ppg, 15.5 rpg, 1.8 bpg on 63 FG%.

You really expect Dwight to win that series with that type of support?

jameer nelson had the best season of his career, hedo turkoglu provided solid support with his 11/5/5, and jason richardson was a nice contributer with his 14/4/2. howard had a major dropoff in his play in the playoffs with huge drops in assists (0.5apg ), steals (0.7spg), and blocks (1.8bpg), on top of almost averaging almost 6 turnovers per game.

at Iverson's skill set being much more effective for his team. Duncan's defense was a big reason the Spurs had an elite defense, and he was easily his team's best and most important offensive player. Iverson's team won on defense and rebounding, and he wasn't great at either.

david robinson was a bigger reason the spurs had an elite defense, i'll give you the fact that he was his teams best offensive player. iverson's team won on iverson's talents, then on defense and rebounding.

Congratulations, the Sixers won 1 more game vs the Lakers, that must mean Iverson is better, right?

yeh it must mean iverson was better huh, especially after duncan went for 12 points and 10 rebounds on 33% over the final 2 games against that same lakers side, en route to getting swept out of the playoffs

Iverson was a great scorer, but you brought up stats which is why I brought up the 30 FGA. 33 ppg on 30 FGA is nothing amazing so you should really stay away from numbers on this one.

i'd rather have 33ppg on 30fga and an nba finals appearance out of a 2 guard, then 24ppg on 19fga and a second round sweep out of a power forward. you should really stay away from any discussion on any subject where i am involved, for your own sake on this one.

5th best clearly behind Shaq, Duncan and Kobe, and also behind Garnett.

clearly behind shaq. also behind kobe. duncan was fourth. garnett? he wasn't even top 7

Not in your wildest delusion.

Hakeem played quite well vs the Lakers.

no as good as robinson played against the suns. o'neal had a positive playoff run. he made the conference finals, and despite losing to the eventual champion bulls, still put up 27/11/4 on 64% from the field.

Your delusions have returned.

your delusions have always been apparent

I'm well aware of that, he still had a poor series, it was well documented.

just because he scored 5 less ppg? new york were by far the slowest paced, and best defensive team in the playoffs, 5 less ppg than his regular season average doesn't mean anything.

Because that team was loaded. Ewing's defensive impact is too much for Drexler to overcome especially since Ewing was a better half court scorer than Drexler making their offense much closer than their defense.

not these excuses again. they had the same team only 2 seasons earlier and finished below .500. how far did ewings offense and defense lead the knicks to?

There was not one season that both Stockton and Ewing were in the league when Stockton was the better player from '89-'97.

ofcourse stockton was better in '88. but in those seasons you mentioned? he was better in '89, '91 (in another league by this stage), '92, and '97.

Ewing was excellent in both of his playoff series, and he had a better regular season than Hakeem on top of it.

You keep sticking to that line, anyone else who sees this thread and my posts will see how ridiculous and unsubstantiated it is.

popular beliefs and ppg, followed by excuses = basis for all shaqattack arguments.

So in other words, Magic was better at being a point guard than Kareem? I guess Norm Nixon was better than Kareem too. Magic did have weaknesses. Outside shooting, half court skill set and defense. Kareem's weaknesses were barely weaknesses and far more minimal.

nixon was definately more impressive in the playoffs. magic was not only a better point guard, but a better player, best in the league infact. magic's weaknesses were nothing compared to abdul-jabbars, lazy getting up and down the court, rebounding liability, mediocre free throw shooter, zero defense aside from shot blocking, slow and weak.

[Money 23]

a number of teams have had the best 2 players in the league

11 heat

The Heat had Dwight Howard?

01 lakers

The Lakers had Tim Duncan?

00 lakers

The Lakers had Kevin Garnett?

99 spurs

The Spurs had Shaquille O'Neal?

96 bulls

The Bulls had David Robinson?

92 bulls

The Bulls had Clyde Drexler?

91 bulls

The Bulls had Magic Johnson?

[ShaqAttack3234]

lol. rose was voted league mvp for a reason. that reason was because he was the most valuable player (or second most valuable in this case) to his teams success, in the entire league.

Rose was clearly less valuable than Howard and Lebron at the very least.

where are you getting this trash from? rose was much more clutch all season long. i would rather have nowitzki in the playoffs that particular season anyway, as i have stated he slightly outplayed rose. but in the regular season the difference was just far, far too much to overcome.

Dirk was just a better player than Rose. He did what Rose did best much better than Rose did, and that's score. He was much more efficient, versatile and difficult to stop. He was a great shooter from everywhere, particularly mid-range, and he could create his own shot very well because of his unstoppable fadeaway. He was unstoppable from both the mid-post area and perimeter, plus he didn't need to dominate the ball like Rose.

who is talking about hypotheticals? i'm talking about facts. nowitzki didn't dominate anything or anyone in the playoffs. 25/9 against the lakers? good, but not great. less than 6 rebounds per game and over 4 turnovers per game against the thunder? not good at all. jason kidd was the best player in the oklahoma series.

It was clear to anyone who watched the 2011 playoffs that Dirk dominated that playoff run. Check out how efficient he was vs the Lakers and he shot 50% in every game. He averaged 32 vs OKC and I'm sure you remember his two 40+ games.

In the 9 games between the Laker and OKC series, Dirk scored at least 25 points in 7 of those games, and shot at least 50% in 8 of those games.

at Kidd being the MVP of the WCF. He was still a nice contributor, but he had declined a ton and simply isn't a star player anymore.

i could go on, but seriously, how many games did you actually watch? or are you just going by popular notion?

When it mattered most, Rose was unbelievably bad in the clutch as I showed, and if he was better, they would have a chance to beat Miami, or they would have at least won an extra game or 2. Do I even need to tell you what Dirk did in the clutch that postseason?

jameer nelson had the best season of his career, hedo turkoglu provided solid support with his 11/5/5, and jason richardson was a nice contributer with his 14/4/2. howard had a major dropoff in his play in the playoffs with huge drops in assists (0.5apg ), steals (0.7spg), and blocks (1.8bpg), on top of almost averaging almost 6 turnovers per game.

Nelson didn't have the best season of his career, and was no more than an average point guard at best. He was not a great facilitator due to his limited court vision and habit of overdribbling, plus he was a terrible defender. Richardson was also no more than an average shooting guard. A one-dimensional shooting guard who didn't provide much other than 3 point shooting. Hedo was ok, but again average for his position. Good playmaker, but inconsistent offensively and also a weak defender.

Plus, Dwight made Orlando a top 3 defensive team and his 14.1 rpg were why Orlando outrebounded opponents by 3.5 rpg. Rose averaged 4.1 rpg and was an average defensive point guard yet Chicago was the best defensive team and outrebounded opponents by 5.7 rpg.

david robinson was a bigger reason the spurs had an elite defense, i'll give you the fact that he was his teams best offensive player. iverson's team won on iverson's talents, then on defense and rebounding.

False, Iverson's team clearly won on defense and rebounding first. They had a top 5 defense statistically and imo, were the most well rounded defense between interior defense and perimeter defense. Plus, they outrebounded opponents by an excellent 4 rpg. Eric Snow and Aaron McKie both averaged more assists than Iverson and handled a lot of the ball-handling allowing Iverson to play shooting guard and look for his own shot.

Iverson was the primary reason Philly was a decent offensive team, but it's false to say Philly won on offense primarily.

And to show how overstated Philly's reliance on Iverson is, they started off 16-4 with Iverson averaging only 24/5/5 on 39 FG%.

As far as David Robinson being more responsible for their defense, well I think both players were comparable defensively at this stage, but Duncan was on the court for 39 mpg, while Robinson only played 30. Either way, Duncan was a big impact player defensively, while Iverson was not, and certainly not in the same ballpark as Duncan defensively.

yeh it must mean iverson was better huh, especially after duncan went for 12 points and 10 rebounds on 33% over the final 2 games against that same lakers side, en route to getting swept out of the playoffs

I'll concede Duncan deserves criticism for that, but if you look at the reasons Philly was more competitive, a lot of them have nothing to do with either player.

Philly was able to contain 1 of the 2 Laker stars much more. Kobe torched the Spurs and exploited their perimeter defense, meanwhile, the Sixers had much better perimeter defenders such as Aaron McKie to slow down Kobe, and if Kobe didn't have easily his worst game of the playoffs, the Lakers would have easily won that game. Plus, Horace Grant wasn't an impact player like previous series because his post defense wasn't very important vs Philly, and finally, Fisher was on an incredible hot streak vs the Spurs and came down to earth vs Philly.

i'd rather have 33ppg on 30fga and an nba finals appearance out of a 2 guard, then 24ppg on 19fga and a second round sweep out of a power forward. you should really stay away from any discussion on any subject where i am involved, for your own sake on this one.

It's amazing how wrong you can be. First of all, Duncan got ot the WCF and lost to the same team Iverson did, and I'd rather have Duncan's more efficient scoring, smarter, more team-oriented offensive play and elite defense and rebounding. Than a volume scorer who is an undersized 2 guard and doesn't have anywhere near the same impact outside of scoring.

clearly behind shaq. also behind kobe. duncan was fourth. garnett? he wasn't even top 7

Well, at least you're right that he was behind Shaq and Kobe, but it's apparent that you have to watch more Duncan and Garnett games.

no as good as robinson played against the suns. o'neal had a positive playoff run. he made the conference finals, and despite losing to the eventual champion bulls, still put up 27/11/4 on 64% from the field.

It's a lot easier to dominate a team with a terrible defense, especially defensive frontcourt like the Suns than the Lakers. Not to mention that many weren't even sure Hakeem's Rockets would be that talented Laker team.

just because he scored 5 less ppg? new york were by far the slowest paced, and best defensive team in the playoffs, 5 less ppg than his regular season average doesn't mean anything.

Watch the series, Pippen had a poor series by his standards. It's revisionist history to suggest otherwise. He was great in the other 3 series, but not in this one. In fairness, he did have an ankle injury, which some thought may have affected him.

not these excuses again. they had the same team only 2 seasons earlier and finished below .500. how far did ewings offense and defense lead the knicks to?

Ewing led the Knicks to a 7th game vs Chicago. I just described why he was clearly a better player than Drexler.

ofcourse stockton was better in '88. but in those seasons you mentioned? he was better in '89, '91 (in another league by this stage), '92, and '97.

I'm undecided on Ewing vs Stockton in '88, but it's possible. Stockton has no case in those other years.

popular beliefs and ppg, followed by excuses = basis for all shaqattack arguments.

Nope, I give detailed assessments of every player's game I discuss. If I can't, then I try to avoid discussing them.

nixon was definately more impressive in the playoffs. magic was not only a better point guard, but a better player, best in the league infact. magic's weaknesses were nothing compared to abdul-jabbars, lazy getting up and down the court, rebounding liability, mediocre free throw shooter, zero defense aside from shot blocking, slow and weak.

This whole post set a new standard for stupidity.

Kareem was their first option offensively as well as their best scorer by far, and their defensive anchor, plus he created a lot of opportunities for teammates with his passing out of double teams. That alone makes it a fact that Kareem was the Lakers best and most valuable player.

Kareem's only real weakness was running the floor, and many centers don't do that much anyway.

[Shep]

Rose was clearly less valuable than Howard and Lebron at the very least.

only lebron was more valuable

Dirk was just a better player than Rose. He did what Rose did best much better than Rose did, and that's score. He was much more efficient, versatile and difficult to stop. He was a great shooter from everywhere, particularly mid-range, and he could create his own shot very well because of his unstoppable fadeaway. He was unstoppable from both the mid-post area and perimeter, plus he didn't need to dominate the ball like Rose.

he was a better shooter than rose. overall offensively rose has the edge with not only his ability to score the basketball, but also being able to get others involved.

It was clear to anyone who watched the 2011 playoffs that Dirk dominated that playoff run. Check out how efficient he was vs the Lakers and he shot 50% in every game. He averaged 32 vs OKC and I'm sure you remember his two 40+ games.

no doubt he played well in the playoffs, but nowhere near well enough to elivate him past rose into the number 3 spot on the official rankings, and he had alot of help. jason terry burned those lakers to the tune of 20/2/4 on 59% from the field, 68% from the 3 point line, and 86% from the free throw line off the bench. peja stojakovic was huge with his 13/2 including 6/6 from downtown in game 4. the mavs bench was a huge reason they won that series.
against okc? yeh i remember the 40 point games, but i also remember the 3 out of 5 games with 5 rebounds or less, and also the 7 turnover game. jason kidd was also the mavs best player in that series.

In the 9 games between the Laker and OKC series, Dirk scored at least 25 points in 7 of those games, and shot at least 50% in 8 of those games.

in those games he also recorded double figures in rebounds once, had less than 3 assists on 4 occasions, had zero steals 6 out of 9 games, had zero blocks 6 out of 9 games, and turned the ball over 3 times or more 5 times.

at Kidd being the MVP of the WCF. He was still a nice contributor, but he had declined a ton and simply isn't a star player anymore.

i'd definately call kidd a star in 2011. he was still one of the best point guards in the league, and top 9 overall. in the western conference finals he averaged 10/5/9 along with over 3 steals per game. in the playoffs he led everyone in the entire league in assists, and steals, along with 3 point field goals. all this while being being a great team defender, and one of the smartest players the game has known.

When it mattered most, Rose was unbelievably bad in the clutch as I showed, and if he was better, they would have a chance to beat Miami, or they would have at least won an extra game or 2. Do I even need to tell you what Dirk did in the clutch that postseason?

he probably used up all his energy keeping the bulls in contention after all the players i have already mentioned played disgusting throughout the series and playoffs, the bulls wouldn't even had made the conference finals if he didn't put them on his shoulders and carry them like he did in the first 2 rounds to the tune of 29 points, 5 rebounds, 8 assists, 2 steals, and 1 block per game.

Nelson didn't have the best season of his career, and was no more than an average point guard at best. He was not a great facilitator due to his limited court vision and habit of overdribbling, plus he was a terrible defender. Richardson was also no more than an average shooting guard. A one-dimensional shooting guard who didn't provide much other than 3 point shooting. Hedo was ok, but again average for his position. Good playmaker, but inconsistent offensively and also a weak defender.

nelson had the best season of his career, playing in 76 games, putting up 13/3/6 with 1 steal per contest. his assists mark was the highest of his career. he was a better than average facilitator, and he made up for his defense with his driving game which was fantastic, his mid range shooting, his quickness and ability on the fast break, and his handles.
richardson was made average by the orlando magic offense, and proved what he was capable of in the previous seasons, and half of season '11. dwight howard did him no favors by clogging the lane. he was made a 3 point shooter.
hedo was a great passer, and ball handler, and a solid small forward.

Plus, Dwight made Orlando a top 3 defensive team and his 14.1 rpg were why Orlando outrebounded opponents by 3.5 rpg. Rose averaged 4.1 rpg and was an average defensive point guard yet Chicago was the best defensive team and outrebounded opponents by 5.7 rpg.

this is just stupid. thats like rose scoring 25ppg was the reason why chicago outscored opponents by 7.3ppg. how far did that defense get the orlando magic? the magic went from 59 wins and a conference finals appearance to 52 wins and a first round loss to a team with 8 less wins than them while howard played like trash. rose's improvement from 2010 to 2011 is the reason why chicago went from a .500 record to the best record in the league.

False, Iverson's team clearly won on defense and rebounding first. They had a top 5 defense statistically and imo, were the most well rounded defense between interior defense and perimeter defense. Plus, they outrebounded opponents by an excellent 4 rpg. Eric Snow and Aaron McKie both averaged more assists than Iverson and handled a lot of the ball-handling allowing Iverson to play shooting guard and look for his own shot.

false. iverson's next best scorer didn't even score 12 points per game. his 31/4/5 along with a league leading 2.5 steals per game was the main reason his sixers had the best record in the east, and made the nba finals.

Iverson was the primary reason Philly was a decent offensive team, but it's false to say Philly won on offense primarily.

iverson was the biggest contributer by far as to the reason why philadelphia was successful.

And to show how overstated Philly's reliance on Iverson is, they started off 16-4 with Iverson averaging only 24/5/5 on 39 FG%.

this trash again. how many good teams did they beat?

As far as David Robinson being more responsible for their defense, well I think both players were comparable defensively at this stage, but Duncan was on the court for 39 mpg, while Robinson only played 30. Either way, Duncan was a big impact player defensively, while Iverson was not, and certainly not in the same ballpark as Duncan defensively.

defensive impact doesn't really mean alot when you are getting swept out of the playoffs contributing 12 points on 33% from the field.

I'll concede Duncan deserves criticism for that, but if you look at the reasons Philly was more competitive, a lot of them have nothing to do with either player.

Philly was able to contain 1 of the 2 Laker stars much more. Kobe torched the Spurs and exploited their perimeter defense, meanwhile, the Sixers had much better perimeter defenders such as Aaron McKie to slow down Kobe, and if Kobe didn't have easily his worst game of the playoffs, the Lakers would have easily won that game. Plus, Horace Grant wasn't an impact player like previous series because his post defense wasn't very important vs Philly, and finally, Fisher was on an incredible hot streak vs the Spurs and came down to earth vs Philly.

more excuses and hypotheticals. more of the same old shit.

[Shep]

It's amazing how wrong you can be. First of all, Duncan got ot the WCF and lost to the same team Iverson did, and I'd rather have Duncan's more efficient scoring, smarter, more team-oriented offensive play and elite defense and rebounding. Than a volume scorer who is an undersized 2 guard and doesn't have anywhere near the same impact outside of scoring.

iverson's heart alone gets him over tim. how did duncan lose? 12ppg on 33% from the field. iverson would not go down like that, that is the difference between iverson and duncan in 2001. how did iverson go down in the same last 2 games against LA? 36 points, 4 rebounds, 3 assists, and 2 steals.

Well, at least you're right that he was behind Shaq and Kobe, but it's apparent that you have to watch more Duncan and Garnett games.

kevin garnett is nowhere near the discussion, he isn't even better than vince carter, chris webber, and tracy mcgrady, let alone allen iverson. duncan was relatively close, but it is easy to tell iverson is the better player of the two.

It's a lot easier to dominate a team with a terrible defense, especially defensive frontcourt like the Suns than the Lakers. Not to mention that many weren't even sure Hakeem's Rockets would be that talented Laker team.

no doubt they were talented, but they were facing the two time defending champions gunning for a three peat featuring some of the best players in the nba at 3 positions, coming off a season where they won 1 less game and won a championship. nobody in their right mind would pick the star-less lakers to win. olajuwon showed his true colors against seattle.

Watch the series, Pippen had a poor series by his standards. It's revisionist history to suggest otherwise. He was great in the other 3 series, but not in this one. In fairness, he did have an ankle injury, which some thought may have affected him.

pippen had a great, all-round series. you and your ppg

Ewing led the Knicks to a 7th game vs Chicago. I just described why he was clearly a better player than Drexler.

drexler led the blazers to the nba finals. who says the knicks beat the 53 win suns featuring the second best point guard and the third best shooting guard in the nba? or what about the 55 win utah jazz featuring the best point guard and best power forward in the nba? i highly doubt it. drexler was able to play better than ewing against the bulls, on a bigger stage, matched up with the best player in the league anyway, putting up 25/8/5/1/1. drexler's play throughout the playoff's was even more proof that he was better than ewing including 26/9/9/1/1 against the lakers, 31/8/7/2/2 against the suns, and 24/5/8/2 against the jazz.

I'm undecided on Ewing vs Stockton in '88, but it's possible. Stockton has no case in those other years.

you obviously have not watched any stockton games.

Nope, I give detailed assessments of every player's game I discuss. If I can't, then I try to avoid discussing them.

This whole post set a new standard for stupidity.

Kareem was their first option offensively as well as their best scorer by far, and their defensive anchor, plus he created a lot of opportunities for teammates with his passing out of double teams. That alone makes it a fact that Kareem was the Lakers best and most valuable player.

Kareem's only real weakness was running the floor, and many centers don't do that much anyway.

kareem was their first option, and he was also a good team defender. this does not make him their best player. magic johnson was. magic was much better at making teammates better, running sets, creating scoring opportunities, and running a team. he also contributed more, had no weaknesses to his game, was finals mvp, stepped up more when it counted, and was just flat out better. easy choice here, no contest.

[ShaqAttack3234]

only lebron was more valuable

Dwight as well.

he was a better shooter than rose. overall offensively rose has the edge with not only his ability to score the basketball, but also being able to get others involved.

Dirk was better, he didn't have to dominate the ball to dominate.

no doubt he played well in the playoffs, but nowhere near well enough to elivate him past rose into the number 3 spot on the official rankings, and he had alot of help.

Dirk had a great regular season too, it was just overshadowed by his amazing playoff run. I had him top 5-6 prior to the playoffs, and the playoffs elevated him to top 4 minimum. I didn't even think Rose was better during the regular season, much less after the playoffs when Dirk played the best ball of his career, while Rose went out with a terrible ECF.

Yeah, Dirk had help, but he won a championship. Everyone needs help to win a title. Rose had help too, but he lost to the same team Dirk beat, and played much worse vs them.

in those games he also recorded double figures in rebounds once, had less than 3 assists on 4 occasions, had zero steals 6 out of 9 games, had zero blocks 6 out of 9 games, and turned the ball over 3 times or more 5 times.

I didn't claim Dirk was a great defender or rebounder, but he is a great offensive player, one of the best of his era. He can score whenever he wants, from wherever he wants, and his skill set makes him a massive mismatch. And we saw what kind of impact "only" being such a great offensive player had. It resulted in a championship, and he made Dallas contenders for the better part of a decade.

i'd definately call kidd a star in 2011.

Kidd was nowhere near star level. He was a remarkable contributor for a 38 year old, but he was pretty much a role player by this point.

he probably used up all his energy keeping the bulls in contention after all the players i have already mentioned played disgusting throughout the series and playoffs

Rose was tired? And you accuse me of excuses? His team obviously wasn't as bad as you say, otherwise they wouldn't have been competitive in just about every ECF game into the 4th or even OT against Miami with Rose having a putrid series, and playing even worse in the 4th quarters when games were up for grabs.

nelson had the best season of his career, playing in 76 games, putting up 13/3/6 with 1 steal per contest. his assists mark was the highest of his career. he was a better than average facilitator, and he made up for his defense with his driving game which was fantastic, his mid range shooting, his quickness and ability on the fast break, and his handles.
richardson was made average by the orlando magic offense, and proved what he was capable of in the previous seasons, and half of season '11. dwight howard did him no favors by clogging the lane. he was made a 3 point shooter.
hedo was a great passer, and ball handler, and a solid small forward.

None of them were even top 10 at their position. And Dwight didn't make Richardson worse, He just didn't have the best playmaker like he did in Phoenix. But even in '10 and '11 with Phoenix, he was still attempting 5-6 threes per game and just 2-3 FTA because as I said, he didn't have the ball-handling ability to consistently create off the dribble.

this is just stupid. thats like rose scoring 25ppg was the reason why chicago outscored opponents by 7.3ppg. how far did that defense get the orlando magic? the magic went from 59 wins and a conference finals appearance to 52 wins and a first round loss to a team with 8 less wins than them while howard played like trash. rose's improvement from 2010 to 2011 is the reason why chicago went from a .500 record to the best record in the league.

The only thing that's stupid is your analogy. Point differential also involves defense, and Chicago was second to none defensively, which of course, wasn't because of Rose.

Howard improved a lot between 2010 and 2011 so Orlando's decline was obviously not because of him. at Howard playing like trash in the 2011 playoffs. When you're teammates pretty much all shoot under 40%, you're not going to win.

Rose's improvement was certainly a big factor in the Bulls improvement which was the primary reason they went from one of the worst offenses to respectable, but at least as big of a factor was going from not even a top 10 defense to the best defense, and a +1.8 rpg team to a +5.7 rpg team.

false. iverson's next best scorer didn't even score 12 points per game. his 31/4/5 along with a league leading 2.5 steals per game was the main reason his sixers had the best record in the east, and made the nba finals.

How does any of this dispute that Philly primarily won on defense and rebounding?

iverson was the biggest contributer by far as to the reason why philadelphia was successful.

He was without question their best player, I'm not disputing that, I have him top 5.

this trash again. how many good teams did they beat?

8 of their 16 wins came against winning teams. Not bad, but you're missing the point as usual, despite the fact that I just destroyed your rebuttal attempt, and the point is, if they relied on Iverson as much as you're suggesting, then they couldn't go 16-4 in any type of realistic schedule with Iverson averaging 24/5/5, 39%.

defensive impact doesn't really mean alot when you are getting swept out of the playoffs contributing 12 points on 33% from the field.

Defensive impact is a huge reason why Duncan is one of the all-time greats.

iverson's heart alone gets him over tim. how did duncan lose? 12ppg on 33% from the field. iverson would not go down like that, that is the difference between iverson and duncan in 2001. how did iverson go down in the same last 2 games against LA? 36 points, 4 rebounds, 3 assists, and 2 steals.

Iverson did have incredible heart, I've always admired him for it, but what you're suggesting is laughable. It's insulting to suggest that Tim doesn't have heart, Iverson had that same heart other years when you never thought he was close to Tim.

kevin garnett is nowhere near the discussion, he isn't even better than vince carter, chris webber, and tracy mcgrady, let alone allen iverson. duncan was relatively close, but it is easy to tell iverson is the better player of the two.

Garnett's all around game alone makes him the right choice over both. Anyone with eyes could see Duncan was better than Iverson.

no doubt they were talented, but they were facing the two time defending champions gunning for a three peat featuring some of the best players in the nba at 3 positions, coming off a season where they won 1 less game and won a championship. nobody in their right mind would pick the star-less lakers to win. olajuwon showed his true colors against seattle.

The Rockets had been decimated by injuries, and had top players at 2 positions, not 3. Hakeem had a poor series by his standards vs Seattle, but David Robinson had a poor series vs a Utah team whose defense was nowhere near as good, and he wasn't swarmed the same way Hakeem was by Seattle, who were one of the best teams I've seen at double-teaming.

drexler led the blazers to the nba finals. who says the knicks beat the 53 win suns featuring the second best point guard and the third best shooting guard in the nba? or what about the 55 win utah jazz featuring the best point guard and best power forward in the nba? i highly doubt it. drexler was able to play better than ewing against the bulls.

Drexler lost to the same Bulls team that Ewing did. Clyde was great vs Phoenix, but he had help with Porter averaging 26/6/8 on 54/41/81, Kersey averaging 18/9/4, 3.2 spg, 1.6 bpg, 52 FG% and Portland still had seven players average double figures in the series. Porter was the most impressive player vs Utah and destroyed the 2nd best point guard John Stockton. Drexler got his ass handed to him in the finals, Ewing was more impressive vs the Bulls.

you obviously have not watched any stockton games.

I've watched too many Stockton games to count, which is why I can rate him correctly, you on the other hand, drool over his assist and steal numbers, and elevate him to a status he never reached.

kareem was their first option, and he was also a good team defender. this does not make him their best player. magic johnson was. magic was much better at making teammates better, running sets, creating scoring opportunities, and running a team. he also contributed more, had no weaknesses to his game, was finals mvp, stepped up more when it counted, and was just flat out better. easy choice here, no contest.

Your first 2 statements about Kareem are important, and why he was still clearly better than Magic. He was the first option for a reason, he was a much better and more reliable scorer than Magic, and he made a much bigger impact defensively. Do you want to try to argue with either of these 2 statements? If you're reasonable and acknowledge them, then you'll see why it's extremely difficult to come up with a logical argument for Magic over Kareem in 1982.

As for the rest of your post, Magic was the best passer in the league, but Kareem could also create in a way that Magic couldn't by drawing double teams. And Magic did have weaknesses in his game as I've stated.

[LA Lakers]

I wouldnt say McHales Playoff performances were underrated. We all knew how great he was...

[Shep]

Dwight as well.

dwight was top 4 most valuable, nowhere near rose.

Dirk was better, he didn't have to dominate the ball to dominate.

rose needed to dominate the ball to put his team in the best possible position to succeed

Dirk had a great regular season too, it was just overshadowed by his amazing playoff run. I had him top 5-6 prior to the playoffs, and the playoffs elevated him to top 4 minimum. I didn't even think Rose was better during the regular season, much less after the playoffs when Dirk played the best ball of his career, while Rose went out with a terrible ECF.

nowitzki's regular season was nothing special. dirk was 15th after the regular season, and the playoffs elevated him to 4th. you don't even think rose was better during the regular season? the only players who were better after the regular season were lebron james and dwight howard. as for the best ball of his career? if you are talking about peak this is nowhere near his peak. if you are talking about pure playoffs? i'll take dirk in 2006 over 2011.

Yeah, Dirk had help, but he won a championship. Everyone needs help to win a title. Rose had help too, but he lost to the same team Dirk beat, and played much worse vs them.

dirk gets his props for winning the championship, but rose also stepped up big in the playoffs as i have previously destroyed including game 1 vs the pacers coming up huge in the fourth quarter to lead the bulls back from being behind by 10 points, finishing with 39 points. game 2 vs the pacers, scoring 8 points over the final 4 minutes of regulation en route to a 36 point night. game 3 vs the pacers, coming up huge again in the final stages, making a go ahead layup inside 20 seconds. playing a massive part in the bulls taking over game 5 in chicago.

I didn't claim Dirk was a great defender or rebounder, but he is a great offensive player, one of the best of his era. He can score whenever he wants, from wherever he wants, and his skill set makes him a massive mismatch. And we saw what kind of impact "only" being such a great offensive player had. It resulted in a championship, and he made Dallas contenders for the better part of a decade.

he is a nice offensive player, but he is also soft, and bigmen who are soft..well it doesn't really translate well into the playoffs as he has underperformed in more playoffs than he has done well in including 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2007, 2008, 2010, and 2012. so out of 12 total playoffs years that he has been involved in he has only impressed in 2006, 2009, and 2011. not a good record at all.

Kidd was nowhere near star level. He was a remarkable contributor for a 38 year old, but he was pretty much a role player by this point.

lol top 4 point guard, top 9 overall. easily a star.

Rose was tired? And you accuse me of excuses? His team obviously wasn't as bad as you say, otherwise they wouldn't have been competitive in just about every ECF game into the 4th or even OT against Miami with Rose having a putrid series, and playing even worse in the 4th quarters when games were up for grabs.

if you have a "putrid series" and are still able to put up 23 points, 4 rebounds, and 7 assists per game you are in good company. not many players could put up those numbers and be labelled as having a "putrid series", only 2 infact: lebron james and dwyane wade. aside from this series, a series in which all-nba first team defender, and best player in the league lebron james defended rose, rose was superb and played at a level nowitzki could not dream of reaching, atleast not in 2011. rose put up 29/5/8/2/1 in the first 2 rounds of the playoffs - leading the bulls past a physical indiana pacers outfit in round 1, and scoring over 32 points on 3 occasions in the dismantling of the atlanta hawks.

None of them were even top 10 at their position. And Dwight didn't make Richardson worse, He just didn't have the best playmaker like he did in Phoenix. But even in '10 and '11 with Phoenix, he was still attempting 5-6 threes per game and just 2-3 FTA because as I said, he didn't have the ball-handling ability to consistently create off the dribble.

richardson was on course to be easily placed in the top 10 at his position before being forced to sit on the 3 point line on offensive sets with orlando. his confidence was shot, he went from attempting 16 shots in 32 minutes to 12 shots in 35 minutes.

The only thing that's stupid is your analogy. Point differential also involves defense, and Chicago was second to none defensively, which of course, wasn't because of Rose.

actually only you are stupid. how many rebounds someone gets also involves how good your teammate disrupts the offensive players shot.

Howard improved a lot between 2010 and 2011 so Orlando's decline was obviously not because of him. at Howard playing like trash in the 2011 playoffs. When you're teammates pretty much all shoot under 40%, you're not going to win.

howard was better in the regular season, but his play in the 2010 playoffs was simply on another level compared to the filth he served up in 2011, including losing to a team with 8 less wins than them, and with home court advantage.

Rose's improvement was certainly a big factor in the Bulls improvement which was the primary reason they went from one of the worst offenses to respectable, but at least as big of a factor was going from not even a top 10 defense to the best defense, and a +1.8 rpg team to a +5.7 rpg team.

yeh but rose is 1 person, defense is all about a team. each person contributes to the defense, rose individually contributed more than the total of each individual combined.

How does any of this dispute that Philly primarily won on defense and rebounding?

iverson is 1 person, defense is all about a team. each person contributes to the defense, iverson individually contributed more than the total of each individual combined

He was without question their best player, I'm not disputing that, I have him top 5.

well i am sorry to inform you that the rank of 5th is not correct for allen iverson in 2001. the correct rank is 3rd.

8 of their 16 wins came against winning teams. Not bad, but you're missing the point as usual, despite the fact that I just destroyed your rebuttal attempt, and the point is, if they relied on Iverson as much as you're suggesting, then they couldn't go 16-4 in any type of realistic schedule with Iverson averaging 24/5/5, 39%.

you have destroyed zero so far, and i highly doubt you will destroy any more than zero for the entirety of this destroying i am handing out. of the 9 away wins only 2 teams were had a better record than the sixers did the previous year, and they did not play any team with a top 6 record in the west (except against the lakers and spurs (in which both games were demolished)). the wins came against middle of the road teams who they should have beaten, and they played against them at the start of the season, the easiest part of the season to pick up easy wins and catch teams off guard.

[Shep]

Defensive impact is a huge reason why Duncan is one of the all-time greats.

we are talking about the 2001 nba season

Iverson did have incredible heart, I've always admired him for it, but what you're suggesting is laughable. It's insulting to suggest that Tim doesn't have heart, Iverson had that same heart other years when you never thought he was close to Tim.

tim duncan did not show heart in the last 2 games of his season

Garnett's all around game alone makes him the right choice over both. Anyone with eyes could see Duncan was better than Iverson.

lol garnett is nowhere in the top 7. duncan was close, but people who know basketball know that iverson was better than him in 2001.

The Rockets had been decimated by injuries, and had top players at 2 positions, not 3. Hakeem had a poor series by his standards vs Seattle, but David Robinson had a poor series vs a Utah team whose defense was nowhere near as good, and he wasn't swarmed the same way Hakeem was by Seattle, who were one of the best teams I've seen at double-teaming.

hakeem was the 3rd best center in the league (second before his disgusting showing in the playoffs), drexler was the second best shooting guard, and robert horry was the third best small forward. olajuwon was swept out of the playoffs after winning the previous 2 championships.

Drexler lost to the same Bulls team that Ewing did. Clyde was great vs Phoenix, but he had help with Porter averaging 26/6/8 on 54/41/81, Kersey averaging 18/9/4, 3.2 spg, 1.6 bpg, 52 FG% and Portland still had seven players average double figures in the series. Porter was the most impressive player vs Utah and destroyed the 2nd best point guard John Stockton. Drexler got his ass handed to him in the finals, Ewing was more impressive vs the Bulls.

drexler got his ass handed to him? i would take getting my ass handed to me (and still managing to put up 25/8/5/1/1) and being matched up with the best player the game has ever seen 1 year removed from his peak after leading my team to its first nba finals in 15 years, and being my teams best and most impressive playoff performer, over losing in the second round of the playoffs against bill cartwright any day.

I've watched too many Stockton games to count, which is why I can rate him correctly, you on the other hand, drool over his assist and steal numbers, and elevate him to a status he never reached.

better than drooling over points per game in losing teams

Your first 2 statements about Kareem are important, and why he was still clearly better than Magic. He was the first option for a reason, he was a much better and more reliable scorer than Magic, and he made a much bigger impact defensively. Do you want to try to argue with either of these 2 statements? If you're reasonable and acknowledge them, then you'll see why it's extremely difficult to come up with a logical argument for Magic over Kareem in 1982.

As for the rest of your post, Magic was the best passer in the league, but Kareem could also create in a way that Magic couldn't by drawing double teams. And Magic did have weaknesses in his game as I've stated.

kareem had more glaring weaknesses to his game. abdul-jabbar was lazy getting up and down the court, was a rebounding liability, a mediocre free throw shooter, provided zero defense aside from shot blocking, and was slow and weak. magic on the other hand was much better at making teammates better, running sets, creating scoring opportunities, and running a team. he also contributed more, played better in the regular season, and much better in the playoffs, had no weaknesses to his game, was finals mvp, stepped up more when it counted, and was just flat out better.

[ShaqAttack3234]

rose needed to dominate the ball to put his team in the best possible position to succeed

Dirk was more productive offensively in the playoffs and did it in a style that allowed others to get involved more.

nowitzki's regular season was nothing special. dirk was 15th after the regular season, and the playoffs elevated him to 4th. you don't even think rose was better during the regular season? the only players who were better after the regular season were lebron james and dwight howard. as for the best ball of his career? if you are talking about peak this is nowhere near his peak. if you are talking about pure playoffs? i'll take dirk in 2006 over 2011.

The fact that you elevated Dirk from 15th to 4th shows that you didn't watch Dirk much during the regular season. And yeah, I thought Dirk was better, I thought Rose was getting overrated from the start, and I thought Dirk was having an underrated season. Should have been an MVP candidate, imo. At least you admit Dwight was better than Rose during the regular season. With the other comment, I was just talking about the playoffs, and 2006 is definitely comparable. As far as peak, I think '11 is up there, but I'm not sure he was better than '06, '07 and '09.

dirk gets his props for winning the championship, but rose also stepped up big in the playoffs as i have previously destroyed including game 1 vs the pacers coming up huge in the fourth quarter to lead the bulls back from being behind by 10 points, finishing with 39 points. game 2 vs the pacers, scoring 8 points over the final 4 minutes of regulation en route to a 36 point night. game 3 vs the pacers, coming up huge again in the final stages, making a go ahead layup inside 20 seconds. playing a massive part in the bulls taking over game 5 in chicago.

Rose was big vs Atlanta, but vs Indiana, he shot 37%, had just 6.2 apg with 3.8 TO, and he was so bad vs Miami, that it overshadows his Atlanta series.

he is a nice offensive player, but he is also soft, and bigmen who are soft..well it doesn't really translate well into the playoffs as he has underperformed in more playoffs than he has done well in including 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2007, 2008, 2010, and 2012. so out of 12 total playoffs years that he has been involved in he has only impressed in 2006, 2009, and 2011. not a good record at all.

The soft label hasn't been appropriate for Dirk in years, and his game has translated to the playoffs remarkably well. How did he underperform in '03? He was great and led Dallas to the WCF. He destroyed Minnesota in '02, and he didn't underperform in '04, '08, '10 and '12 either.

if you have a "putrid series" and are still able to put up 23 points, 4 rebounds, and 7 assists per game you are in good company. not many players could put up those numbers and be labelled as having a "putrid series", only 2 infact: lebron james and dwyane wade. aside from this series, a series in which all-nba first team defender, and best player in the league lebron james defended rose

No, it means that you're so ball-dominant that you'll still put up numbers even when you're terrible. With those 23.4 ppg were 24 FGA and 35% and 3.8 TO to go with those 6.6 apg.

richardson was on course to be easily placed in the top 10 at his position before being forced to sit on the 3 point line on offensive sets with orlando. his confidence was shot, he went from attempting 16 shots in 32 minutes to 12 shots in 35 minutes.

Bottom line, Richardson was not top 10, and it's not Dwight's fault that Richardson needs the best passer in the league to spoon-feed him open shots.

actually only you are stupid. how many rebounds someone gets also involves how good your teammate disrupts the offensive players shot.

And Rose was lucky to have teammates who forced so many misses.

howard was better in the regular season, but his play in the 2010 playoffs was simply on another level compared to the filth he served up in 2011, including losing to a team with 8 less wins than them, and with home court advantage.

In 2010, Howard was not much of a factor offensively vs Charlotte and constantly in foul trouble, and he didn't bother showing up vs Boston until they were already down 3-0. Regardless, there's nothing Howard could have done in the '10 playoffs to make him equal to 2011. There were just clear improvements in his game that made him a much better player and were obvious throughout the 2011 season.

yeh but rose is 1 person, defense is all about a team. each person contributes to the defense, rose individually contributed more than the total of each individual combined.

I'm not comparing Rose or Iverson to any one of their teammates, I'm talking about the overall help they had, and the defense and rebounding their teammates provided was very important.

you have destroyed zero so far, and i highly doubt you will destroy any more than zero for the entirety of this destroying i am handing out. of the 9 away wins only 2 teams were had a better record than the sixers did the previous year, and they did not play any team with a top 6 record in the west (except against the lakers and spurs (in which both games were demolished)). the wins came against middle of the road teams who they should have beaten, and they played against them at the start of the season, the easiest part of the season to pick up easy wins and catch teams off guard.

If they were as bad as many make them out to be, they couldn't start off 16-4 vs any schedule with Iverson playing that poorly.

we are talking about the 2001 nba season

\
Yes, and Duncan's defensive impact was enormous as always.

lol garnett is nowhere in the top 7. duncan was close, but people who know basketball know that iverson was better than him in 2001.

People who know basketball know that Iverson was never close to Duncan.

hakeem was the 3rd best center in the league (second before his disgusting showing in the playoffs), drexler was the second best shooting guard, and robert horry was the third best small forward. olajuwon was swept out of the playoffs after winning the previous 2 championships.

Horry was never anywhere near a top 3 small forward, and Drexler as a top 2 shooting guard in '96 is very questionable.

drexler got his ass handed to him? i would take getting my ass handed to me (and still managing to put up 25/8/5/1/1) and being matched up with the best player the game has ever seen 1 year removed from his peak after leading my team to its first nba finals in 15 years, and being my teams best and most impressive playoff performer, over losing in the second round of the playoffs against bill cartwright any day.

I'd take a game 7 vs the Bulls despite an inferior team to what Portland had. I'd take classic games like games 1 and 6 over anything Drexler did in the series.

kareem had more glaring weaknesses to his game. abdul-jabbar was lazy getting up and down the court, was a rebounding liability, a mediocre free throw shooter, provided zero defense aside from shot blocking, and was slow and weak. magic on the other hand was much better at making teammates better, running sets, creating scoring opportunities, and running a team. he also contributed more, played better in the regular season, and much better in the playoffs, had no weaknesses to his game, was finals mvp, stepped up more when it counted, and was just flat out better.

You pretty much just said that Magic is a better PG than Kareem again. That's true, but Kareem was still clearly the better player. Magic having no weaknesses in his game in '82 is a blatant lie. Kareem deserved the finals MVP as well.

[Im Still Ballin]

I agree OP. McHale was a top 5 guy in '86 and '87. A league with prime Bird, Magic, and young phenom Jordan.

[1987_Lakers]

Nice bump.

Look at the quality of posts we had back in the day and compare it to now. smh.

[L.Kizzle]

Damn, the same 4 posters were on McHale bandwagon 10 years ago. Nice.