CBS sport new top 50 ever (#2. LeBron, #10. Kobe, #38. Paul Pierce... not included: James Worthy)
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> General Basketball Discussion Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763

PostPosted: Sun Feb 19, 2017 7:16 am    Post subject:

Dreamshake wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:

A direct comparison between two players' specific abilities isn't particularly relevant to an all-time list. Curry was the best player in the league (or at least top 2-3) at his peak. Pippen might have been top 5-10 at his peak.


I disagree. Curry wouldn't have been a top 2-3 player in any season Pippen played. When comparing players from two completely different era's I think it's best to look at their actual skills. I also don't think Curry was the best player in the league at any point, or even top 2-3. He just won MVP's, similar to Nash. He's never been better than LeBron or Durant. He didn't look better than Kyrie last year when they went head up. Etc.


Good luck selling that argument to anyone. Last year, Curry swept the first place votes for MVP, 131-0. The previous year it was 100-25 over Harden. Comparing him to Nash is silly.

Anyway, both this survey and the ESPN survey are not just lists drawn up by some random blogger. These were surveys by panels of experts and pundits. We're all free to have our own opinions and to disagree with the panels. But if you want to get an idea of what the consensus looks like, the panels are a good indication.

ESPN had Pippen at 25 and Isiah at 26. Curry was at 23.

CBS has Pippen at 22 and Isiah at 35. Curry is at 19.

Personally, I think the ESPN ranks for those three players are more accurate. Either way, the consensus is becoming pretty clear. If you just don't like Curry, which seems to be the case, sorry.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
vanexelent
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 May 2005
Posts: 30081

PostPosted: Sun Feb 19, 2017 7:35 am    Post subject:

governator wrote:
vanexelent wrote:
I love their explanation for Paul Pierce and CP3, which was basically "not sure why we rank them here because they never did much, but we think their good".


Those 2 and Dwight over Worthy... not right


And I actually really like Paul Pierce. But he's no James Worthy. All those "clutch" performances where Pierce got the Celtics to the playoffs alone? That era of the Eastern Conference was perhaps the worst I've ever seen.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Dreamshake
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 05 May 2006
Posts: 13707

PostPosted: Sun Feb 19, 2017 4:10 pm    Post subject:

vanexelent wrote:
Dreamshake wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
Dreamshake wrote:
That list is garbage. I stopped reading when I saw Isiah at #35, with Iverson right in front of him.


Isiah and Iverson are both polarizing. I would probably put Thomas a little higher, but not much. I really don't know what I'd do with Iverson.


Isiah led teams to two titles, and beat Magic, Jordan and Bird along the way. I don't see how half those guys are ahead of him.


Not sure if you remember but Magic played 1 full game in the 89' Finals. Not to mention Byron Scott missed it all.


And Isiah got hurt while up 3-2 the prior year. Injuries happen.

Either way, he's led teams to two titles and half the guys they put ahead of him can't make that claim.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Dreamshake
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 05 May 2006
Posts: 13707

PostPosted: Sun Feb 19, 2017 4:14 pm    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
Dreamshake wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
Dreamshake wrote:
That list is garbage. I stopped reading when I saw Isiah at #35, with Iverson right in front of him.


Isiah and Iverson are both polarizing. I would probably put Thomas a little higher, but not much. I really don't know what I'd do with Iverson.


Isiah led teams to two titles, and beat Magic, Jordan and Bird along the way. I don't see how half those guys are ahead of him.


That's the Isiah hype machine. The media loved him, and he was a brilliant self promoter. He was a pretty good player, for sure, but not one of the all-time greats. Chauncey Billups led the Pistons to one title (and within one game of a second title), and beat Shaq, Kobe, and Lebron. Isiah was a better player than Billups, but otherwise the analogy is right on point. Being the leader of a championship team does not make you an all-time great.


Billups doesn't have a 19/4/9 career avg (20/5/9 postseason). He's never made an All-NBA 1st team. Never led the league in assists, or anything. That's production, not a hype machine.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Dreamshake
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 05 May 2006
Posts: 13707

PostPosted: Sun Feb 19, 2017 4:19 pm    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:

Good luck selling that argument to anyone. Last year, Curry swept the first place votes for MVP, 131-0. The previous year it was 100-25 over Harden. Comparing him to Nash is silly.


Similar to Nash, he got MVP's from being the best player on the best team. And in both playoff years it was clear to anyone watching the postseason that he was not the games best player. By last years postseason, when he wasn't facing a team with an injured PG like every series two years ago, it was quite questionable whether or not he was even the best PG on the floor, much less the best player on Earth.

He's popular for sure, as his high ranking on this list shows. But the games best player, never that. LeBron, Durant.....gap.....everyone else. And I don't think I would have to sell that to anyone.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763

PostPosted: Sun Feb 19, 2017 6:06 pm    Post subject:

Dreamshake wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
Dreamshake wrote:

Isiah led teams to two titles, and beat Magic, Jordan and Bird along the way. I don't see how half those guys are ahead of him.


That's the Isiah hype machine. The media loved him, and he was a brilliant self promoter. He was a pretty good player, for sure, but not one of the all-time greats. Chauncey Billups led the Pistons to one title (and within one game of a second title), and beat Shaq, Kobe, and Lebron. Isiah was a better player than Billups, but otherwise the analogy is right on point. Being the leader of a championship team does not make you an all-time great.


Billups doesn't have a 19/4/9 career avg (20/5/9 postseason). He's never made an All-NBA 1st team. Never led the league in assists, or anything. That's production, not a hype machine.


As you can see, I agree with you that Isiah is a better player than Billups. However, 19/4/9 doesn't make you one of the all-time greats. Isiah led the league in assists one time. He played in an era in which PGs got lots of assists due to the style of play. During the championship seasons, he wasn't even top five in the league.

So the argument for Isiah boils down to him leading the Pistons to two titles. That's where you run into Chauncey Billups.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763

PostPosted: Sun Feb 19, 2017 6:11 pm    Post subject:

Dreamshake wrote:
Similar to Nash, he got MVP's from being the best player on the best team.


Or it could have had something to do with averaging 30 ppg and leading the league in TS% and a number of advanced stats.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Dreamshake
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 05 May 2006
Posts: 13707

PostPosted: Sun Feb 19, 2017 8:17 pm    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
Dreamshake wrote:
Similar to Nash, he got MVP's from being the best player on the best team.


Or it could have had something to do with averaging 30 ppg and leading the league in TS% and a number of advanced stats.


Nash had great numbers when he won his MVP's as well. I'm not trying to say Curry isn't great or didn't have great production. I'm saying he fell into the best player on the best team category. No one is taking Curry over LeBron or Durant at any point the past 3 seasons. It's clear to anyone watching basketball that he's clearly not better than either one of those guys, and he's arguably not even the best PG in the league, or better than Harden or Leonard either.

Harden and Westbrook are the MVP favorites this year. Both have crazy numbers. Harden came in 2nd two years ago. Putting a MVP on one of their mantles won't equate them with being the best player alive though, just like it didn't with Curry. You still would take LeBron and Durant before them, and after those two it's a pick em with around 5 other dudes. Same with Curry over the last 3 seasons.

As far as Isiah, 19/4/9 are great numbers for a PG. Stockton is at 13/3/11. Kidd is at 15/7/9. Magic is at 20/7/11. CP3 is at 19/4/10. Yes, those numbers are there with all-time great PG's, plus two titles (and less than 10 guys have led a team to two). So if you've done something that less than two guys in league history have done, going through top 10 ever players along the way, and you have HOF type production over 13 seasons, then a ranking in the 30's is laughable.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470

PostPosted: Sun Feb 19, 2017 8:48 pm    Post subject:

Dreamshake wrote:
Similar to Nash, he got MVP's from being the best player on the best team.


I think that is too simplistic. Nash won his first MVP in s squeaker against Shaq, who had a pretty so-so year by his standards. So I'd say Nash largely got that one because of weak competition. Take Nash with the same stats and team record, and he doesn't win many years.

Nash's second MVP was the weird scrum where 6 guys got first place votes, and the guys with the best personal performance weren't on the best team. Nash won the scrum; no idea why. Again, he doesn't win in many other years.

Curry was altogether different. He simply blew away the competition. Especially his second year. He was unanimous because he was on the best team ever and had one of the best individual seasons ever. Not many years he loses.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763

PostPosted: Sun Feb 19, 2017 9:11 pm    Post subject:

So Curry is another Nash. Gotcha. Suffice it to say that you're in the minority, as shown by the ESPN and CBS Sports rankings.

Stockton had almost 7,000 more career assists than Isiah, and about 900 more career playoff assists than Isiah. Stockton led the league in apg nine times. Isiah did that once. Stockton is the all-time leader in steals, and he made the all-defense team five times. Isiah never made the all-defense team. Isiah really isn't close to Stockton.

Kidd had 3,000 more career assists than Isiah. and about 300 more in the playoffs. Kidd did that in a low-assist era. He actually led the league in apg five times. Isiah did that once. Kidd was also the best defensive PG of his era and made the all-defense team nine times. I would probably rank Isiah over Kidd because Kidd was such a zero as a scorer for most of his career.

I understand that Isiah is one of those polarizing players. If you look at him in the context of his time, he just wasn't that great. He didn't have a long career, and his peak value wasn't all that high. The highest he ever finished in the MVP voting was 5th, and the second highest was eighth.

As I said earlier, I like the ESPN rank (26) better than the CBS Sports rank (35). I don't see Kidd ranking higher than Isiah. You seem to think that Isiah should be even higher. I just don't think so.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Dreamshake
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 05 May 2006
Posts: 13707

PostPosted: Sun Feb 19, 2017 9:36 pm    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
Dreamshake wrote:
Similar to Nash, he got MVP's from being the best player on the best team.


I think that is too simplistic. Nash won his first MVP in s squeaker against Shaq, who had a pretty so-so year by his standards. So I'd say Nash largely got that one because of weak competition. Take Nash with the same stats and team record, and he doesn't win many years.

Nash's second MVP was the weird scrum where 6 guys got first place votes, and the guys with the best personal performance weren't on the best team. Nash won the scrum; no idea why. Again, he doesn't win in many other years.

Curry was altogether different. He simply blew away the competition. Especially his second year. He was unanimous because he was on the best team ever and had one of the best individual seasons ever. Not many years he loses.


I agree with that. I guess the point I'm trying to make is it was clear Curry was not the best player in basketball. LeBron, Durant....gap....everyone else. MVP trophy doesn't equate to being the games best.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Dreamshake
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 05 May 2006
Posts: 13707

PostPosted: Sun Feb 19, 2017 9:40 pm    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
So Curry is another Nash. Gotcha. Suffice it to say that you're in the minority, as shown by the ESPN and CBS Sports rankings.


No, Curry is another MVP winner that won awards when it was clear he was not the best player alive. Someone will win MVP this year, and it likely won't be one of the two guys that are clearly on a different realm than everyone else (Curry included).

As far as the Zeke's numbers compared to other PG's, most with more career assists played longer than he did. I stand by my comment that a 19/4/9 avg for a PG over a decade plus is HOF type production. And he led a team to two titles on top of that production. And we can also disagree on 13 seasons not being a long career.

Aeneas Hunter wrote:

You seem to think that Isiah should be even higher.


Yes, I think it's laughable that a guy with elite production that has led a team to two titles is ranked behind guys that have never led a team to a title. There is no way the following guys should be ahead of him:

AI
Ewing
Drexler
Kidd
Nash
Robinson
CP3
Barkley

I mean, CP3 has almost the same numbers and has never been past round 2. He's 14 spots ahead of a HOF PG with the same numbers that led his team to 2 titles and 3 Finals?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
AllorNothing
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 08 Oct 2001
Posts: 18448

PostPosted: Mon Feb 20, 2017 3:35 am    Post subject:

I would take MJ, wilt, magic, Duncan ,Kareem, and Olajuwon and Shaq before LeBron right now. It might change if he gets a couple more rings.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763

PostPosted: Mon Feb 20, 2017 7:20 am    Post subject:

Dreamshake wrote:
I mean, CP3 has almost the same numbers and has never been past round 2. He's 14 spots ahead of a HOF PG with the same numbers that led his team to 2 titles and 3 Finals?


Emoticons don't make your argument stronger. I'd take Paul over Isiah in a heartbeat. Paul is a greater player in every respect (including self-promotion). You're comparing stats without accounting for era, disregarding defense, and ultimately resting your case on the fact that Isiah had the good fortune to play on championship teams in the latter part of his career.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
nevitt_smrek
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 15 Jun 2009
Posts: 2800

PostPosted: Mon Feb 20, 2017 1:18 pm    Post subject:

I'd love to have James Worthy on my side when the chips are down. More of a big game performer than many on the list, if not most.
_________________
Smrek 2, Nevitt 1, Barkley 0
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

PostPosted: Mon Feb 20, 2017 1:32 pm    Post subject:

Meh. No one ever produces a list in which everyone will unilaterally agree so, meh.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Goldenwest
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2801

PostPosted: Mon Feb 20, 2017 9:07 pm    Post subject:

another list based on popularity among sports writers and subjective stats.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470

PostPosted: Mon Feb 20, 2017 10:06 pm    Post subject:

Goldenwest wrote:
another list based on popularity among sports writers and subjective stats.


Any rankings of players is inherently subjective.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Goldenwest
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2801

PostPosted: Mon Feb 20, 2017 10:09 pm    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
Goldenwest wrote:
another list based on popularity among sports writers and subjective stats.


Any rankings of players is inherently subjective.


Its not like Science is it? Even though some people might pretend it is.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470

PostPosted: Thu Feb 23, 2017 12:33 pm    Post subject:

Dreamshake wrote:
activeverb wrote:
Dreamshake wrote:
Similar to Nash, he got MVP's from being the best player on the best team.


I think that is too simplistic. Nash won his first MVP in s squeaker against Shaq, who had a pretty so-so year by his standards. So I'd say Nash largely got that one because of weak competition. Take Nash with the same stats and team record, and he doesn't win many years.

Nash's second MVP was the weird scrum where 6 guys got first place votes, and the guys with the best personal performance weren't on the best team. Nash won the scrum; no idea why. Again, he doesn't win in many other years.

Curry was altogether different. He simply blew away the competition. Especially his second year. He was unanimous because he was on the best team ever and had one of the best individual seasons ever. Not many years he loses.


I agree with that. I guess the point I'm trying to make is it was clear Curry was not the best player in basketball. LeBron, Durant....gap....everyone else. MVP trophy doesn't equate to being the games best.



That's reasonable. The "best player in the game" is really a comment about how someone has done over a period of time or how you guess someone will do in the future.

MVP is a reflection of what a player did in one specific regular season.

I think most people would agree that Lebron and Durant are the two top players in the NBA today. Not sure I agree about the huge gap between them and Curry, though.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> General Basketball Discussion All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2018 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB