Skip and Shannon list their all time top 10

[nyknick]

We should have an All Time Top 10 thread every six months just so we can ban everyone that doesn't have Duncan in their top 3.

The Coli would improve exponentially

 

[Swagnificent]

When he played he won 6 MVPs... When Duncan played he was always in the playoffs and won 5 rings and considered the best player EVER at his position... You really picked the wrong two people to pull out because they were lauded while playing

And yes... Nobody is making a top 10 list full of "who would win one on one".. Resume always matters.. Pat Mahomes can throw it around better than Montana but Montana being 4-0 will trump that. A rod vs Brady.. We know who got more talent but who's the goat?

Resume matters.. Nobody cares about your meaningless stats that lead to nothing

Guess you don't know me. I rank Rodgers way higher than Brady. Cause I'm consistent. I rate all athletes by their ability to play the game not about how lucky or unlucky they were in their careers.

Kareem had 6 MVPs cause his prime coincided with the weakest era in NBA history. The 1970s had another league in existence that included arguably the second best player in the world at that time (Dr. J) and many other stars. The NBA was low on talent and that allowed Kareem to accumulate accolades he wouldn't have gotten had there been more competition like say the 1960s when Wilt played.

Context like that is why I rate players based on the eye test than accolades. Awards and stats are subject to circumstances. Talent and skill isn't.

 

[The Devil's Advocate]

Guess you don't know me. I rank Rodgers way higher than Brady. Cause I'm consistent. I rate all athletes by their ability to play the game not about how lucky or unlucky they were in their careers.

Kareem had 6 MVPs cause his prime coincided with the weakest era in NBA history. The 1970s had another league in existence that included arguably the second best player in the world at that time (Dr. J) and many other stars. The NBA was low on talent and that allowed Kareem to accumulate accolades he wouldn't have gotten had there been more competition like say the 1960s when Wilt played.

Context like that is why I rate players based on the eye test than accolades. Awards and stats are subject to circumstances. Talent and skill isn't.

I can accept that you've picked a way to judge and you're going with that. That's fine. People can grade on whatever scale they see fit.

I only see a problem with your last statement. Talent and skill is based on the rules of the game. So yea Giannis has more skills than Kareem, but did the rules allow for Kareem to play the same game that Giannis does? Would anyone play like Steph Curry if everyone had to play man the entire game and moving screens were called like the 70s?

So even skill and talent isn't infallible because literally everyone today has more skill and talent than dudes from the 80s and before. Pat Bev got more talent than bob Cousy but who in their right mind would say Bev is better

 

[Swagnificent]

I can accept that you've picked a way to judge and you're going with that. That's fine. People can grade on whatever scale they see fit.

I only see a problem with your last statement. Talent and skill is based on the rules of the game. So yea Giannis has more skills than Kareem, but did the rules allow for Kareem to play the same game that Giannis does? Would anyone play like Steph Curry if everyone had to play man the entire game and moving screens were called like the 70s?

So even skill and talent isn't infallible because literally everyone today has more skill and talent than dudes from the 80s and before. Pat Bev got more talent than bob Cousy but who in their right mind would say Bev is better

Disagree with the idea players are more skilled now. Shooting more 3s doesn't make you more skilled. How many PGs in today's game can post up like Mark Jackson back in the day? Sure styles of play change with eras but there's a give and take. As players of today become more focused on outside shooting things like low post skills fade.

Go and watch some highlights of Wilt. He had the Dirk fadeaway jumper before Dirk. Players in the past were just as skilled and athletic as modern players. We just don't watch their tape as much and make assumptions based on the few highlights we see repeated all the time.

 

[Ozymandeas]

Realest top 10

1. Jordan
2. Kareem
3. Lebron
4. Kobe
5. Magic
6. Wilt
7. Bird
8. Shaq
9. Duncan
10. Russell
11. Curry

I don't like LeBron (personally i'm switching Kobe & Bron) but, this is a respectable list

 

[Ozymandeas]

Tim was clearly better.
People just mad that dominance on both sides of the ball matters.

He wasn't though. Its revisionism. When was Tim Duncan's era (keyword: era) where he was the greatest basketball player in the NBA? Wasn't the early 2000s because Shaq was killing it then. Wasn't the mid 2000s because Kobe was that guy then. Wasn't the late 2000s because Kobe and Bron were those guys then. When was this mythical period?

 

[Ozymandeas]

So how did Kobe go from 2nd to 9th?

Because of Bron/media bias. I will never fw Bron because imo, he had to create superteams to get his rings. But lets say I did think Bron was that nikka. It wouldn't make me hate Kobe. But for Bron stans, its not enough for them for Bron to be potentially called the GOAT. Kobe also has to be irrelevant. Which is bizarre. It would be like having Brady as the GOAT QB then having Manning ranked as the 10th QB. You would say anybody who thinks like that is clearly just biased against Manning, or against Kobe in this case. Its all good though. Bron gonna retire one day too.

 

[Hey_zeus]

What Centers are better than Shaq?

Wilt
Kareem
Hakeem

And Timmy for those that say he's a Center. I don't

 

[murksiderock]

The mid 2000s lakers were rebuilding, and then mid 2010s was Achilles time

So out of that 12 year period, only like 7 were true contenders. (05 and 06 had smush Parker and Kwame brown, and medvedenko). (And 2014-2016 was Achilles).

And in that span, he made 3 finals, and won 2.

So it's not crazy to assume that from 96-2004, if they built a contender around him, he could have gotten 2-3 chips

He got to three conference finals so a third is believable, but you said up to 5 ...

 

[Shadow King]

If Kobe didn’t die he would’ve been booted out the top 10 by everyone but laker stans. 20 years and only 1 MVP?

No he wouldn't.

 

[Swagnificent]

Because of Bron/media bias. I will never fw Bron because imo, he had to create superteams to get his rings. But lets say I did think Bron was that nikka. It wouldn't make me hate Kobe. But for Bron stans, its not enough for them for Bron to be potentially called the GOAT. Kobe also has to be irrelevant. Which is bizarre. It would be like having Brady as the GOAT QB then having Manning ranked as the 10th QB. You would say anybody who thinks like that is clearly just biased against Manning, or against Kobe in this case. Its all good though. Bron gonna retire one day too.

It's a sign of insecurity. Deep down they know Kobe was better they just like LeBron more. So to convince themselves Kobe isn't better they have believe the gap is so huge that Kobe's name never comes up. If Kobe isn't even top 5 all-time then they don't need to grapple with their deeply held belief that he was probably better than LeBron. Outta sight outta mind.

Compare that to me. According to most of the Bron stans on this site I'm allegedly the biggest LeBron hater there could be and yet I have him rated 4th all-time in my rankings while having Kobe (the guy I'm the hugest stan for) at 2nd/3rd all-time. The difference between me and them is I don't need to convince myself that LeBron was significantly inferior to Kobe so I can convince myself that Kobe was better. I can admit to myself LeBron was almost as good. Kobe was just better.

 

[Remote]

He wasn't though. Its revisionism. When was Tim Duncan's era (keyword: era) where he was the greatest basketball player in the NBA? Wasn't the early 2000s because Shaq was killing it then. Wasn't the mid 2000s because Kobe was that guy then. Wasn't the late 2000s because Kobe and Bron were those guys then. When was this mythical period?

You are making a “narratives” argument. Nothing you allege is rooted in facts. But I’ll give you a hint that you won’t like: there was never a season, ever, where Kobe Bryant was the single best player in the NBA.

Bryant, like Duncan, was among the best for many years. And Duncan was among the best for more of those years than Bryant was.

 

[Yzak]

Bron is #1 imo. I don't see a better rounded, dominant player in their prime than Bron.

 

[Yzak]

Tim was clearly better.
People just mad that dominance on both sides of the ball matters.

That's why LeBron is the goat

 

[murksiderock]

No he wouldn't.

Where do you personally rank Kobe, bro?

SI's 50 greatest players in NBA history

Michael Jordan. LeBron James. Stephen Curry. Who else? On the 20–year anniversary of the 50 Greatest Players in NBA history, SI.com's Jack McCallum revises his list.

www.si.com

All-Time #NBArank: The greatest players ever

We're counting down the greatest players in NBA history.

es.pn

Bleacher Report's All-Time Player Rankings: NBA's Top 50 Revealed

A total of 4,374 players have appeared in at least one NBA game. How can anyone whittle that number down to the top 50? Attempting to create that list is an excruciating endeavor...

syndication.bleacherreport.com

CBS Sports' 50 greatest NBA players of all time: Where do LeBron, Curry rank?

Twenty years after the NBA celebrated its original 50 greatest, we're updating things a bit

www.cbssports.com

🐐 SLAM's Top 100 Players Of All-Time: Michael Jordan, No. 1 🐐

Fueled by doubters, MJ went on to win six championships, six Finals MVPs, five regular season MVPs, and 10 scoring titles.

www.slamonline.com

These are 5 respected and reputable sports rags, just to give examples. Pre-death, the outlier was SLAM having Kobe at #5, the other four ranked him between 10 and 14 with an average ranking of 12; all five entities combined give him an average ranking of 10.6...

The complete turnabout on Kobe as a Top 10 lock, much less debatable Top 5, is attributable to the emotions The Culture collectively has for him that rushed out once he passed...

The spillover effect is that in the short term, for at least a half-decade following his death, his career and his work will be inflated to heights he wasn't at while alive. In life, aside from 20% outliers like SLAM and individuals who mainly were Kobe Stans, Kobe's place as a Top 10 GOAT was hotly contested---->he was not in any way viewed as a locked in GOAT 10 guy...

But he obviously had the resume and work on the board that having him in the discussion was more than fair; honestly the pre-death consensus on Kobe was parallel to where Steph is actively right now: debatable Top 10 so if he sneaks into someone's back end GOAT 10 it isn't really anything to get riled about, certainly GOAT 15, and there are 20% outliers (shout out to @Ohene ) who rank him as Top 5 as is...

That is EXACTLY where Kobe was at before he passed...

This board is overrun with Kobe heads, so of course the majority opinion on here wont mirror the consensus within The Culture. I'm saying all this to say, if Kobe was alive, given that he already debatably wasn't a GOAT 10 player, its entirely feasible he'd gradually shift further from GOAT 10 discourse...

Since his death 29 months ago he's risen from a borderline Top 10 guy to a Top 10 lock and many more people arguing for him as Top 5, though nothing on the floor has happened to actually warrant this huge leap in perception. It is what is. The further we are removed from his passing, we'll gradually shift back to where his placement makes sense...

For the record I have him in the 8-10 range, i dont think there is any strong argument for him higher than the 8th greatest player ever and certainly not Top 5; I also think any ranking below 12 is too low but it's not wild to me if someone says Kobe isn't in their Top 10----->that was a majority opinion before he died...

It's a sign of insecurity. Deep down they know Kobe was better they just like LeBron more. So to convince themselves Kobe isn't better they have believe the gap is so huge that Kobe's name never comes up. If Kobe isn't even top 5 all-time then they don't need to grapple with their deeply held belief that he was probably better than LeBron. Outta sight outta mind.

Compare that to me. According to most of the Bron stans on this site I'm allegedly the biggest LeBron hater there could be and yet I have him rated 4th all-time in my rankings while having Kobe (the guy I'm the hugest stan for) at 2nd/3rd all-time. The difference between me and them is I don't need to convince myself that LeBron was significantly inferior to Kobe so I can convince myself that Kobe was better. I can admit to myself LeBron was almost as good. Kobe was just better.

Most Bron heads don't factor in Kobe with how they view Bron. They grade them separately unless directly compared. If I'm evaluating Kobe's historical place it's based on him and where he fits amongst ALL the historical titans; Kobe heads made up this propaganda that if someone has an opinion on Kobe it has to correlate with how they view LeBron, and that just ain't the wave...