Re: Official #39 NBA Player Of All Time According To ISH
Quote:
Originally Posted by Los Angeles
How is Adrian Dantley not on your mention list?
24.3 PPG on .540 FG for a 6'5 guard is ridiculous...he also averaged 5.7 rebounds per game, 1 SPG and 3 APG.
But his scoring ability should be enough for him to get at least recognized as the 39th best player of all-time. NBA Rookie Of The Year, 6 time All-Star...certainly enough credentials for him to be among those mentioned.
Dominique Wilkins should also be on that ballot...
Are you the same person who's keeps bringing up Dantley--or are there actually more than one?
I suppose if I were to only look at statistics, I couldn't deny that Dantley should be considered now. But, past that, it's clear to me that he's not to be seriously considered yet.
Moreover, why would Dantley be ahead of Dominique Wilkins, who's career overlapped 9 seasons with Dantley and who was considered a better player at about the same position and with similar strength(s) (scoring)?
Alex English is another player with similar credentials--why not him over Dantley?
Or how about Paul Arizin? He was a career 22.8 PPG scorer, won 2 scoring titles, and once led the league in FG% at 6'4". He also has a couple of things over Dantley: namely, a championship and 3 All-NBA 1st Team selections. Why does Dantley go above Arizin?
Scoring isn't that special, and that's why he shouldn't be seriously considered here. He didn't make the NBA's 50 Greatest Players, nor Kalb's 50 list.
There are plenty of better all-around players still left to make this list.
Re: Official #39 NBA Player Of All Time According To ISH
Quote:
Scoring isn't that special, and that's why he shouldn't be seriously considered here.
How high is Charles Barkley on that list? Never won a championship, was not a great defensive player...please tell me again that "scoring" isn't important?
Charles Barkley is as high as he is because scoring IS important, and people recognized his offensive prowess.
Dantley was one of the greatest scorers of all-time, for a his size he grabbed his share of rebounds...his ridiculously high efficiency for his size should obviously be noted. Yeah I agree his play making ability and defense isn't as effective as some of the players on that nomination list, but his instinct for controlling the glass and his pure ability to put the ball in the basket are two key components in the game of basketball.
Quote:
There are plenty of better all-around players still left to make this list.
Dantley was an offensive machine, if Dirk Nowitzki deserves to get votes...and if Charles Barkley gets to be among the 20 greatest players of all-time. Then Dantley should be be a legit nominee.
Last edited by West-Side : 07-30-2007 at 04:10 PM.
Re: Official #39 NBA Player Of All Time According To ISH
Quote:
Originally Posted by D-Fence
Scoring isn't that special, and that's why he shouldn't be seriously considered here. He didn't make the NBA's 50 Greatest Players, nor Kalb's 50 list.
if there is one thing I've learned over the last 38 ballots - scoring IS that special.
Re: Official #39 NBA Player Of All Time According To ISH
Quote:
Originally Posted by West-Side
How high is Charles Barkley on that list? Never won a championship, was not a great defensive player...please tell me again that "scoring" isn't important?
Charles Barkley is as high as he is because scoring IS important, and people recognized his offensive prowess.
I never got a chance to vote for Barkley. That said, he was undeniably a much better player than Dantley. You don't need to qualify this with his size, Barkley was a great rebounder. He muscled bigmen in the paint on a daily basis. He was even a better passer and playmaker than Dantley. He lead teams deep into the playoffs and even to the Finals once. He made 5 All-NBA teams. He was an MVP and nearly won another MVP, as well as being in contention several other times. This is not a favorable comparison for Dantley. Sure, Barkely wasn't much defensively, but that's about Barkley's only weakness.
Quote:
for a his size he grabbed his share of reboundsp
Why remark on the unremarkable.
Quote:
Dantley was an offensive machine, if Dirk Nowitzki deserves to get votes...and if Charles Barkley gets to be among the 20 greatest players of all-time. Then Dantley should be be a legit nominee.
Dirk Nowitzki doesn't deserve to get votes at this point, but at least he's an MVP. I'd probably put Dirk and Dantley in a similar range, but post-50 range.
I don't think rather one-dimensional players should go over well-rounded winners. Why not vote for Dennis Rodman instead of one-dimensional scoring machines? Rodman was a standout rebounder and defensive player and he was a winner. He could also pass and help offensively. But, no, he didn't score a lot. Nate Thurmond, Wes Unseld--they also helped teams win more than one-dimensional scoring machines did. I say scoring isn't as special as many here are making it out to be.
Re: Official #39 NBA Player Of All Time According To ISH
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kobe=MVP07`
Pistol pete
please dont give it to nash thiiiiiis early!!!
and please dont vote for walton he had 1 really good year and the rest were just solid, not great..
You're complaining about Nash and Walton, and then you go and vote for Pistol Pete? Pistol really never did anything in the NBA spectacular enough to put him in ahead of Alex English/Paul Arizin/Dantley/Earl Monroe. He had a fabulous collegiate career, arguably the greatest collegiate career of all-time, but at the pro level he wasn't anything more than a great scorer and passer who took his teams absolutely nowhere. I can understand voting for him for changing the game into a form of art with his dazzling ballhandling/passing skills, but it's still a little early for him.
Re: Official #39 NBA Player Of All Time According To ISH
Adrian Dantley should not be the 30 or 40 spots he probably ends up ahead of Mark Aguirre. He was neither better or all that much more accomplished than Lebron is right now.
Nate Thurmond or Wes Unseld would be my pick at this point. Kevin Mchale also considered. Best ball ive seen anyone play who isnt on this list though was Walton in the 77 finals. Only saw about 2 and a half of the games but he was the truth.
Nate and Wes probbaly split votes and keep eachother from winning. both underrated though. Even as offensive players. I watched Nate play a game in I think 1974 and he was knocking down jumpers like KG. Really. Just pullup 20 footers like nothing. And Unseld was just a beast. Hes a guy you have to respect. 5 minutes of him makes you see how good he was. I'll probably vote Nate for the moment since I just have to pick one.
Re: Official #39 NBA Player Of All Time According To ISH
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jailblazers7
Wes Unseld
He is one of the greatest rebounders of all-time despite his slight size disadvantage. He wasnt a defensive force but he could hold his own against the great bigmen that he played against in his era. Won MVP and ROY in the same year when he averaged 14 ppg and 18 rpg. Was a great passer as the stories of his legendary outlet passes do him justice. He had around 4 apg a year. He lead the Bullets to the '78 championship in which he won Finals MVP.
He was a:
5-Time All-Star
1968-69 MVP and ROY
1977-78 Finals MVP
1968-69 All-NBA First Team and All-Rookie Team
Ranks 6th All-Time in Rebounds Per Game
Ranks 10th All-Time in Total Rebounds
Re: Official #39 NBA Player Of All Time According To ISH
Haha...What does that suppose to mean??? He still aint top 50...
