T-Mac, Klay Thompson, Dikembe Mutombo, Vince Carter, Artis Gilmore or Pau Gasol are some candidates that seem missing, but who would you pull out of the 75?
No Dwight Howard is messed up. _________________ “You have to dance beautifully in the box that you are comfortable dancing in.” - Kobe Bryant
T-Mac, Klay Thompson, Dikembe Mutombo, Vince Carter, Artis Gilmore or Pau Gasol are some candidates that seem missing, but who would you pull out of the 75?
Yao too
Maybe Reggie Miller? I see TMac as the superior player
T-Mac, Klay Thompson, Dikembe Mutombo, Vince Carter, Artis Gilmore or Pau Gasol are some candidates that seem missing, but who would you pull out of the 75?
Once you get to 50-100 there's a lot of room for debate.
Guys I could see dropping off the list: Dave Bing, Nate Archibald, Damon Lilliard, Paul Arizin, Jerry Lucas.
They're all great players, but I am not sure they are really any better than some guys who were left off.
You can see the east coast bias on the list, practically everyone on the Knicks two title teams in the 1970’s made it. I’m surprised Phil Jackson didn’t make the list after Walt Frazier, Earl Monroe, Bill Bradley, Dave Debusschere, Willis Reed and Jerry Lucas made it.
You can see the east coast bias on the list, practically everyone on the Knicks two title teams in the 1970’s made it. I’m surprised Phil Jackson didn’t make the list after Walt Frazier, Earl Monroe, Bill Bradley, Dave Debusschere, Willis Reed and Jerry Lucas made it.
Bill Bradley didn't make the team.
A few of those Knicks are borderline choices -- Debusschere, Lucas, and Monroe would all be in my top 100, but I'm not sure they would be in my top 75. That said, I can't really say they are unreasonable choices. And for me, Lucas makes the team based on his play in Cincinnati, not on the last few years of his career on the Knicks.
Anyway, I don't really see an east-choice bias on the team myself. I think they did a good job, and I wouldn't quibble with 90% of their choices.
I know Klay Thompson has made noise about not making the team. I see him as an end-of-the-list guy, who could have made the team or not. So I don't see him being left off as an example of east-coast bias either.
(I also think the notion of "east coast bias" is a cliche that isn't all that relevant in the modern age when media and time zones have become less important because of technology).
(I also think the notion of "east coast bias" is a cliche that isn't all that relevant in the modern age when media and time zones have become less important because of technology).
That's true. As someone who lives in the middle of the country, I just don't see it. There tends to be a big market bias for obvious reasons. But the idea that the "east coast media" controls everything is obsolete. This is usually a device for claiming that ESPN hates the Lakers. _________________ Internet Argument Resolved
You can see the east coast bias on the list, practically everyone on the Knicks two title teams in the 1970’s made it. I’m surprised Phil Jackson didn’t make the list after Walt Frazier, Earl Monroe, Bill Bradley, Dave Debusschere, Willis Reed and Jerry Lucas made it.
Bill Bradley didn't make the team.
A few of those Knicks are borderline choices -- Debusschere, Lucas, and Monroe would all be in my top 100, but I'm not sure they would be in my top 75. That said, I can't really say they are unreasonable choices. And for me, Lucas makes the team based on his play in Cincinnati, not on the last few years of his career on the Knicks.
I know nothing about those Knicks teams or era but was Earl Monroe that good to be solid top 90? Stats not too gaudy. Also wondering about Dolph Schayes stats in the 50s relative to other big men. These are questions, not comments, because I don't know to judge.
I think of Klay, Pau, Kyrie, Dwight as potential snubs with none jump out as massively wrong, and I don't know enough about so many on the list to say one way or the other.
Edit to add that I find it debatable for AD to be on here at this stage. Klay has a better case right now. I would like AD to be, by the end of his career with us, absolutely unquestionable as top 75, but he has not taken that step that I'd been hoping for since we first got him. Years later, jury still out (well I hope it's jury's not in anyway) whether he can be #1 Laker legend leader guy as his talent and skills would indicate as a ceiling. Right now he's Pau and Worthy. Great, sure, but not the team's driving force. The other guys on the list who were not the top leader on their team had longevity of career and sustained excellence to deserve to be on there.
You can see the east coast bias on the list, practically everyone on the Knicks two title teams in the 1970’s made it. I’m surprised Phil Jackson didn’t make the list after Walt Frazier, Earl Monroe, Bill Bradley, Dave Debusschere, Willis Reed and Jerry Lucas made it.
Bill Bradley didn't make the team.
A few of those Knicks are borderline choices -- Debusschere, Lucas, and Monroe would all be in my top 100, but I'm not sure they would be in my top 75. That said, I can't really say they are unreasonable choices. And for me, Lucas makes the team based on his play in Cincinnati, not on the last few years of his career on the Knicks.
I know nothing about those Knicks teams or era but was Earl Monroe that good to be solid top 90? Stats not too gaudy. Also wondering about Dolph Schayes stats in the 50s relative to other big men. These are questions, not comments, because I don't know to judge.
I think of Klay, Pau, Kyrie, Dwight as potential snubs with none jump out as massively wrong, and I don't know enough about so many on the list to say one way or the other.
Edit to add that I find it debatable for AD to be on here at this stage. Klay has a better case right now. I would like AD to be, by the end of his career with us, absolutely unquestionable as top 75, but he has not taken that step that I'd been hoping for since we first got him. Years later, jury still out (well I hope it's jury's not in anyway) whether he can be #1 Laker legend leader guy as his talent and skills would indicate as a ceiling. Right now he's Pau and Worthy. Great, sure, but not the team's driving force. The other guys on the list who were not the top leader on their team had longevity of career and sustained excellence to deserve to be on there.
1. It’s hard to compare across eras, especially with a guy like Schayes, whose career began in 1950. He made 12 all-NBA teams and finished second in MVP voting in 58. He was probably the 4th or 5th best player in the 1950s. He’s a legitimate choice.
2. I put Earl Monroe in the same class as Pete Maravich – flashy players who captivated people with their wizardry but were probably overrated as basketball players. I wouldn't have put him on the list myself, but he's generally ranked high among all-time shooting guards.
3. I have no problem with AD making it. He's been in the league 9 years. He's made 8 all-star teams and 4 all-NBA teams. He's a career 24-10 guy. He's had as much or more sustained excellence as a lot of guys on the list whose careers are over.
4. I am not sure if Klay has better credentials than AD. Klay is soon to turn 32, and he is three years older than AD. He's played 8 years, made 5 all-star teams, and 2 all-NBA teams. It's anyone's guess when he will return from his injury and how he will be when he returns.
why single out Harden as if Pau deserves on before Harden. Maybe make the case with someone else but not Harden.
7x All-NBAs (and counting) to Pau's 4, been in the top 5 for MVP voting for many seasons and won one.
Im no fan of Harden but there's no debate he gets into a top 75 list well before Pau _________________ (bleep) Kawhi
4. I am not sure if Klay has better credentials than AD. Klay is soon to turn 32, and he is three years older than AD. He's played 8 years, made 5 all-star teams, and 2 all-NBA teams. It's anyone's guess when he will return from his injury and how he will be when he returns.
I’m surprised that there has been a fuss about Klay. He’s had a good career, but I wouldn’t have thought of him as an obvious top 75 player. _________________ Internet Argument Resolved
Joined: 27 May 2010 Posts: 49086 Location: LA to the Bay
Posted: Fri Oct 22, 2021 4:31 pm Post subject:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
activeverb wrote:
4. I am not sure if Klay has better credentials than AD. Klay is soon to turn 32, and he is three years older than AD. He's played 8 years, made 5 all-star teams, and 2 all-NBA teams. It's anyone's guess when he will return from his injury and how he will be when he returns.
I’m surprised that there has been a fuss about Klay. He’s had a good career, but I wouldn’t have thought of him as an obvious top 75 player.
There is a little bit of hub-bub about it today. For me I wouldn't say necessarily AD versus Klay but I definitely could see Dame versus Klay or a Carmelo vs Klay Because Dame and Carmelo have not won anything.
I think my issue with a lot of the modern day selections is OK – after you list the obvious guys who changed the trajectory of the sport in their given eras, record holders, etc then you're just looking at picking out amazing players in a league of amazing players. So for me it becomes about winning and championship pedigree. A lot of these folks have done nice things on paper and then didn't actually win anything so you know it's challenging.
4. I am not sure if Klay has better credentials than AD. Klay is soon to turn 32, and he is three years older than AD. He's played 8 years, made 5 all-star teams, and 2 all-NBA teams. It's anyone's guess when he will return from his injury and how he will be when he returns.
I’m surprised that there has been a fuss about Klay. He’s had a good career, but I wouldn’t have thought of him as an obvious top 75 player.
There is a little bit of hub-bub about it today. For me I wouldn't say necessarily AD versus Klay but I definitely could see Dame versus Klay or a Carmelo vs Klay Because Dame and Carmelo have not won anything.
I think my issue with a lot of the modern day selections is OK – after you list the obvious guys who changed the trajectory of the sport in their given eras, record holders, etc then you're just looking at picking out amazing players in a league of amazing players. So for me it becomes about winning and championship pedigree. A lot of these folks have done nice things on paper and then didn't actually win anything so you know it's challenging.
Joined: 27 May 2010 Posts: 49086 Location: LA to the Bay
Posted: Fri Oct 22, 2021 4:37 pm Post subject:
governator wrote:
TDRock wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
activeverb wrote:
4. I am not sure if Klay has better credentials than AD. Klay is soon to turn 32, and he is three years older than AD. He's played 8 years, made 5 all-star teams, and 2 all-NBA teams. It's anyone's guess when he will return from his injury and how he will be when he returns.
I’m surprised that there has been a fuss about Klay. He’s had a good career, but I wouldn’t have thought of him as an obvious top 75 player.
There is a little bit of hub-bub about it today. For me I wouldn't say necessarily AD versus Klay but I definitely could see Dame versus Klay or a Carmelo vs Klay Because Dame and Carmelo have not won anything.
I think my issue with a lot of the modern day selections is OK – after you list the obvious guys who changed the trajectory of the sport in their given eras, record holders, etc then you're just looking at picking out amazing players in a league of amazing players. So for me it becomes about winning and championship pedigree. A lot of these folks have done nice things on paper and then didn't actually win anything so you know it's challenging.
If Klay then Kyrie too
Yep. I thought about Kyrie too ahead of Melo and Dame.
4. I am not sure if Klay has better credentials than AD. Klay is soon to turn 32, and he is three years older than AD. He's played 8 years, made 5 all-star teams, and 2 all-NBA teams. It's anyone's guess when he will return from his injury and how he will be when he returns.
I’m surprised that there has been a fuss about Klay. He’s had a good career, but I wouldn’t have thought of him as an obvious top 75 player.
There is a little bit of hub-bub about it today. For me I wouldn't say necessarily AD versus Klay but I definitely could see Dame versus Klay or a Carmelo vs Klay Because Dame and Carmelo have not won anything.
I think my issue with a lot of the modern day selections is OK – after you list the obvious guys who changed the trajectory of the sport in their given eras, record holders, etc then you're just looking at picking out amazing players in a league of amazing players. So for me it becomes about winning and championship pedigree. A lot of these folks have done nice things on paper and then didn't actually win anything so you know it's challenging.
If Klay then Kyrie too
Yep. I thought about Kyrie too ahead of Melo and Dame.
I'll grant Kyrie the ring while riding shotgun to Lebron but for the rest of his career, as a top dog, he's been the conductor of some of the worse teams in the league. His four years in Cleveland prior to Lebron held the worse record in the league over that span. Boston went to the ECF after he was injured. Prior to KD arriving, the Nets had a better record without him than with him.
He's a supremely gifted scorer and one of the few you can give the ball and get you a clutch bucket. Handles are off the charts. Beyond that, he's pretty useless . Not a floor raiser to his teammates, below average defense, zero leadership skills to speak of. The icing on the cake? You don't even know when this guy will show up.
I understand why they went with the original 50 and adding on 25 but for me, I'd remove half the old school Celtics and Knicks and make some room. Dwight gets shat on but his body of work is unassailable imo. _________________ KOBE
4. I am not sure if Klay has better credentials than AD. Klay is soon to turn 32, and he is three years older than AD. He's played 8 years, made 5 all-star teams, and 2 all-NBA teams. It's anyone's guess when he will return from his injury and how he will be when he returns.
I’m surprised that there has been a fuss about Klay. He’s had a good career, but I wouldn’t have thought of him as an obvious top 75 player.
There is a little bit of hub-bub about it today. For me I wouldn't say necessarily AD versus Klay but I definitely could see Dame versus Klay or a Carmelo vs Klay Because Dame and Carmelo have not won anything.
I think my issue with a lot of the modern day selections is OK – after you list the obvious guys who changed the trajectory of the sport in their given eras, record holders, etc then you're just looking at picking out amazing players in a league of amazing players. So for me it becomes about winning and championship pedigree. A lot of these folks have done nice things on paper and then didn't actually win anything so you know it's challenging.
If Klay then Kyrie too
Yep. I thought about Kyrie too ahead of Melo and Dame.
I'll grant Kyrie the ring while riding shotgun to Lebron but for the rest of his career, as a top dog, he's been the conductor of some of the worse teams in the league. His four years in Cleveland prior to Lebron held the worse record in the league over that span. Boston went to the ECF after he was injured. Prior to KD arriving, the Nets had a better record without him than with him.
He's a supremely gifted scorer and one of the few you can give the ball and get you a clutch bucket. Handles are off the charts. Beyond that, he's pretty useless . Not a floor raiser to his teammates, below average defense, zero leadership skills to speak of. The icing on the cake? You don't even know when this guy will show up.
I understand why they went with the original 50 and adding on 25 but for me, I'd remove half the old school Celtics and Knicks and make some room. Dwight gets shat on but his body of work is unassailable imo.
They didn't go with the original 50 and add 25.
They had 88 new voters who each filled out a ballot with their 75 choices.
They were under no obligation to vote for any of the original 50.
The original 50 just happened to make the team. But there was no plan to make it that way. I was a little surprised myself I thought a couple of them would get booted off
4. I am not sure if Klay has better credentials than AD. Klay is soon to turn 32, and he is three years older than AD. He's played 8 years, made 5 all-star teams, and 2 all-NBA teams. It's anyone's guess when he will return from his injury and how he will be when he returns.
I’m surprised that there has been a fuss about Klay. He’s had a good career, but I wouldn’t have thought of him as an obvious top 75 player.
I think there was a fuss because Klay himself made a fuss. He wouldn't have been an unreasonable choice, but I also don't think the list is marred by not having him on it.
All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous1, 2, 3, 4Next
Page 2 of 4
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
