All-Time Best Player

[3th]

Wilt Chamberlain

[J@3]

You see my point those 4(Plus Russell) are the top 5 C's and Bill may not even make the top 3 of that list so saying he is the greatest player ever is a bit out of line IMO.

Wow you have got to be kidding. Why do people like you put SO much importance on offensive numbers? Bill Russell was to defense as Wilt Chamberlain/Kareem/Shaq whoever was to offense. They didn't count blocked shots back then, but from all accounts I've read it wasn't uncommon for him to get 15-20 blocks in a game, could you imagine anyone in this day and age doing anything remotely like that? Not to mention the fact that Shaq, Hakeem, Kareem and Wilt combined won 14 NBA championships, Bill Russell won 11.

It's not as if he was Ben Wallace offensively either. If we're going to get into numbers, he averaged 15.1ppg over his career to go with his 22.5 rpg, now put that in perspective... Hakeem's career ppg/rpg is 21/11... so Russell averaged more rebounds than Hakeem did points, and more points than Hakeem did rebounds... it is almost the same with Shaq, which is why I'm always confused as to why there's so much of a focus on point scoring. There's also this from Wikipedia... "Some estimates from certain NBA officials have Russell averaging over 10 blocks a game during his career." and he was only 6'9! He also averaged 4.3apg over his career, which is almost as many as Hakeem + Shaq combined. Kareem and Wilt are legends and are comperable to Russell in many ways, but to say he might not even beat out Hakeem and Shaq? Please.

Then again, apparentely I'm not the only one...

In 1980, he was named the greatest player in the history of the NBA by the Professional Basketball Writers Association of America.

Not bad for a guy who may not be one of the top 4 C's in history

[debiler]

Each of the players mentioned has earned his merits for different reasons.

Wilt was the most dominant figure this sport has ever seen and probably will ever see.
Russell was the most important player in his era. Without him, the Celtics would have won diddly-squat...
Kareem invented the skyhook which was his unstoppable go-to move during his whole career.
Hakeem was the cunniest center of all time. His footwork and excellent ability to read the opponent's defense is unequaled among centers.
And finally Shaq. In a time where the game was dominated by guards and shooters, there was one last giant standing. And that IS a big achievement. He is the most powerful player ever to play in the NBA (not most dominating).

[rongotai]

You see my point those 4(Plus Russell) are the top 5 C's and Bill may not even make the top 3 of that list so saying he is the greatest player ever is a bit out of line IMO.

Wow you have got to be kidding. Why do people like you put SO much importance on offensive numbers? Bill Russell was to defense as Wilt Chamberlain/Kareem/Shaq whoever was to offense. They didn't count blocked shots back then, but from all accounts I've read it wasn't uncommon for him to get 15-20 blocks in a game, could you imagine anyone in this day and age doing anything remotely like that? Not to mention the fact that Shaq, Hakeem, Kareem and Wilt combined won 14 NBA championships, Bill Russell won 11.

It's not as if he was Ben Wallace offensively either. If we're going to get into numbers, he averaged 15.1ppg over his career to go with his 22.5 rpg, now put that in perspective... Hakeem's career ppg/rpg is 21/11... so Russell averaged more rebounds than Hakeem did points, and more points than Hakeem did rebounds... it is almost the same with Shaq, which is why I'm always confused as to why there's so much of a focus on point scoring. There's also this from Wikipedia... "Some estimates from certain NBA officials have Russell averaging over 10 blocks a game during his career." and he was only 6'9! He also averaged 4.3apg over his career, which is almost as many as Hakeem + Shaq combined. Kareem and Wilt are legends and are comperable to Russell in many ways, but to say he might not even beat out Hakeem and Shaq? Please.

INFLATED INFLATED INFALTED

Russell's stats are completely inflated due to the era he played in. Yes he was an amazing rebounder and a amazing shot blocker but if you actually think if he played in his prime in this day and era and average 22 RPG your crazy his -de-flated stats would be arund 10 PPG..14 RPG..3-4 BPG

Plus im not big on C's who can never once shoot over 50 % in their entire career.For me Wilt is # 1 in all time C's with Kareem just behind him, Russel Shaq and Hakeem are tough to sort out but I think the order of those 3 could go anyway.

[adv1s5]

Wilt, as the best individual player. Insane athleticism, natural scoring ability, superior defense, in one season averaged almost nine assists. He could do it all. Unstoppable in his time.

He did only win one championship, but I don't believe that that the number of rings a player has is based more on an individuals talent then a teams. Michael Jordan was of course incredibly talented but he did had some help, as did Russell and Kareem and all of that.

[J@3]

Russell's stats are completely inflated due to the era he played in. Yes he was an amazing rebounder and a amazing shot blocker but if you actually think if he played in his prime in this day and era and average 22 RPG your crazy his -de-flated stats would be arund 10 PPG..14 RPG..3-4 BPG

Who gives a shit if he couldn't average 15/22/10 in today's game, he did it in his own era. It was still the NBA, and in case you haven't noticed no one's invented any sort of time machine so unless you want to drag Bill Russell out onto the court at 70 years old or whatever he is then you'll never know how his stats would hold up in this day and age. Players from years ago shouldn't have to hold up to how the game is today, is it their fault that things are changing? Why should their accomplishments or statistics be ignored purely because they wouldn't be able to do it 30-40 years later.

You can only beat the competition in front of you, in 15 years I'm pretty sure people will be saying Jordan would've never been able to score over the much taller SG's, or Shaq would've been too slow to be effective etc. Your attempt at guessing his current day statistics is pretty poor, since I'm assuming you've never actually seen him play before you say it, I've seen three full games of his... it isn't much, but it's more than highlights. By that logic we shouldn't consider ANYONE who played before 1990 a legend or anything because their stats were inflated by their era No offense but that's a very very weak argument.

Plus im not big on C's who can never once shoot over 50 % in their entire career.For me Wilt is # 1 in all time C's with Kareem just behind him, Russel Shaq and Hakeem are tough to sort out but I think the order of those 3 could go anyway.

Why is Wilt #1? He played in the same era, aren't his stats inflated or do you have a secret formula which tells you that he would've put up 25/12 in today's game? Russell's shooting percentage obviously hurt him, it must've been tough shooting 45% and leading your team to 11 championships.

[Silas]

rongotai, I'm beginning to think you dont understand the game. Every time Wilt and Russell would face off, Wilt would look forward to it as an individual battle, he couldn't wait to get out on the court and go against Russell, while Russell saw it as a team battle. He'd let Wilt get his 40 points but Boston would still win the game.

He was the best passer, rebounder, shot blocker, and leader on his team, and for the latter two, in the NBA. Dont forget he also coached his team while playing on it later in his career.

There has never been, nor will they're ever be as great a team player and winner as Bill Russell.

People always like to say the top 3 guys in the history of basketball were Magic, Larry, and Michael, but a lot of times people forget the guys who may possibly be 1 and 2, Bill Russell and Oscar Robinson.

[J@3]

He was the best passer, rebounder, shot blocker, and leader on his team, and for the latter two, in the NBA. Dont forget he also coached his team while playing on it later in his career.

Yep, and that team was also stacked with Hall Of Famers, so to be the best anything on that team is incredible in itself.

[rongotai]

No time for long post right now but will give basic post lol

Silas Im not saying Russell was some crap player because he wasn't he was an amazing player and one of the greatest but saying he is literally the greatest of all time is just crazy. Also because say someone lets in 40 points in but his team wins it makes him better, ok nice logic ?

Also Jae the main statistic that is usually inflated was reboudning I mean there were so some great rebounders in those eras like the Russell's and the Baylor's but I sitll believe there was alot of more shots thrown up and therefore more chances for rebounds.

[J@3]

saying he is literally the greatest of all time is just crazy.

Why? You still haven't given any actual reason apart from saying his stats are inflated.

[---]

Oscar Robinson

At least spell his name right

[rongotai]

saying he is literally the greatest of all time is just crazy.

Why? You still haven't given any actual reason apart from saying his stats are inflated.

The reason is is that he isn't even the best all time at his own position.

oh yeah and that guy I forgot his name I think it's um MJ

[J@3]

So in conclusion you really have no solid argument

I don't even disagree that he's not the greatest of all time, arguments could easily be made for MJ, Wilt etc but to say he'd just scrape into the top 5 in his position is beyond ridiculous.

[rongotai]

lol I suck with NBA history and I know that but I do try LMAO

[sdot_thadon]

His airness, best of all time, period. Wilt was dominant in a league full of average guys, as were most of the old heads. MJ not only dominanted during one of the most talented eras of NBA history, he redefined the game into what we watch today. And maybe if he didn't run off chasing fantasies a couple of times the bulls could have easily won 8-10 titles in the 90's.(keyword=could have). The man in his prime had no weakness on the court, it often gets overlooked that he was pretty great overall too. Oscar Robertson, legend. but he pulled it off in a weaker era of basketball. This is not even a question.

[Air Zoom Kobe I]

SO EVERYONE here is going to say that Kobe Bryant is not in this Discussion? Are you serious!
Look at his stats from the 1997-98 season on: he's averaged at least 16 points and 5 assists a season.

He's a great defender, but not as good as MJ was. But he's pretty close

KB8 has eclipsed how good Jordan was at ages 20-27. Give him 10 more years and NO DOUBT in MY MIND if he gets 3 More Rings, nah Screw that he doesnt need 3 more rings, He just needs to RIP opposing Defenses Apart, then we'll see.

[sdot_thadon]

KB8 has eclipsed how good Jordan was at ages 20-27.

not quite the only thing Kobe does is shoot better sooner, not score better.

MJ 1st 10 seasons' scoring averages: 28.2, 22.7(injured only played 18 games), 37.1, 35.0, 32.5, 33.6, 31.5, 30.1, 32.6, and 26.9(17 game comeback season)

Kobes': 7.6, 15.4, 19.9, 22.5, 28.5, 25.2, 30.0, 24.0, 27.6, 35.4

Great? yes. In MJ's league, not even. The song Like Mike was made for Kobe: "if I could be like mike" I suggest watching some ESPN Classic and trying that one again young man.(sarcasm)

[---]

I don't think most people realize it is far easier to score these days than back in the early-mid 90's

EDIT: Some people may take "score" the wrong way. What I mean is it is just easier to put up high point averages nowadays.

[Air Zoom Kobe I]

KB8 has eclipsed how good Jordan was at ages 20-27.

not quite the only thing Kobe does is shoot better sooner, not score better.

MJ 1st 10 seasons' scoring averages: 28.2, 22.7(injured only played 18 games), 37.1, 35.0, 32.5, 33.6, 31.5, 30.1, 32.6, and 26.9(17 game comeback season)

Kobes': 7.6, 15.4, 19.9, 22.5, 28.5, 25.2, 30.0, 24.0, 27.6, 35.4

Great? yes. In MJ's league, not even. The song Like Mike was made for Kobe: "if I could be like mike" I suggest watching some ESPN Classic and trying that one again young man.(sarcasm)

LOL OK THANK you. I meant In Raw talent. Of COurse


But Anyway what I'm saying is look at how KOBE scores in traffic, scores from the outside, how he dunks. He just has that swagger.
He does everything at a high lever. He has that Ability just like Jordan to take over a game whenever he can.


IN 10 YEARS he WILL be the Greatest.

[---]

Have you ever seen Mike play?

[nets4life]

IN 10 YEARS he WILL be the Greatest.

You have got to be shitting me. No one and i repeat no one can dominate the basketball court like MJ did. I dont see Kobe getting to MJ's level when his career is over.

[sdot_thadon]

He does everything at a high lever. He has that Ability just like Jordan to take over a game whenever he can.

Mike was Neo to Kobe's Morpheus, MJ is the one in the hoop Matrix. Kobe almost disappeared in Phoenix, Mike lost in the post season, but never disappeared.

[---]

Kobes in his prime now. clutchcity, in 10 years Kobe Bryant will be 38 years old. What makes you think he will be better at 38 than 28? Sure he will probably be even better next year, but thats only going to carry on for a max of probably 4 years, increasing by less and less each year, then he will begin to decline like everyone else. Just to show you what age can do, look at Shaquille O'Neals stats at age 34 (March this year) compared to age 24

Age 23: 26.2ppg 12.5rpg 3.1apg 2.9bpg

Age 34: 20.0ppg 9.2rpg 1.9apg 1.8bpg

Over ten years, he's lost:

6.2ppg 3.3rpg 1.2apg 1.1bpg

And remember that he is one of the most dominant centers of all time, definately the most dominant of his era, and centers are probably the position least effected by age. Also, don't forget that he is only 34, and think of his stats 4 years from now? They definately are not going up. Ive given the best case scenario... most dominant center, least effected by age, at age 34. Now think of Kobe Bryant, a gaurd, gaurds rely on quickness and agility, something age takes away. Think of Kobe at age 34, he may still be going strong, but I don't think he will be as good as he is now... then think of him 4 years after that, then try and compare him to Michael Jordan.

[Gundy]

Unlike some other sports, being the all-time best player in the NBA is not just about the numbers one puts up. It is also about the things that can't be measured or averaged. Not only was MJ far better than Kobe statistically, he was also far better in terms of intangibles. When MJ was on the court, everyone around him played better. His team had the mentality that they couldn't lose just by him being there. Kobe does not have the same effect on his players. Jordan was spectacular while at the same time he made his team better. Kobe is spectacular, thats it. MJ played with his team while Kobe is the team. Yes Kobe is one of the greatest to ever play the game, but he is out of his league compared to Jordan.

[nets4life]

game, set, match mr flite 23