Top 10 players ever since 1970

[In SVG We Trust]

I'm just making the '70 cut because I'm tired of people putting Wilt or Russell when they haven't seen even one game of them. And I don't want disrespect NBA history but those days basketball was awful as f**k, with a lot of players on the rosters who couldn't play even in the D-League nowadays.

So here's my ranking:

1-Jordan
2-LeBron
3-KAJ
4-Shaq
5-Duncan
6-Kobe
7-Magic
8-Bird
9-Olajuwon
10-Mo Malone

[DocRI]

I'm just making the '70 cut because I'm tired of people putting Wilt or Russell when they haven't seen even one game of them. And I don't want disrespect NBA history but those days basketball was awful as f**k, with a lot of players on the rosters who couldn't play even in the D-League nowadays.

^ Too late.

[In SVG We Trust]

I'm just making the '70 cut because I'm tired of people putting Wilt or Russell when they haven't seen even one game of them. And I don't want disrespect NBA history but those days basketball was awful as f**k, with a lot of players on the rosters who couldn't play even in the D-League nowadays.

^ Too late.

You think those role players would be pro athletes nowadays?

[Pharaoh]

Wilt, Russell, Cousy, Hav, Logo...

Role players?

[In SVG We Trust]

Wilt, Russell, Cousy, Hav, Logo...

Role players?

No, I was talking about aside from the stars, the level of the league was pretty bad. You just need to watch a full game of that era to see it.

[Pharaoh]

Wilt, Russell, Cousy, Hav, Logo...

Role players?

No, I was talking about aside from the stars, the level of the league was pretty bad. You just need to watch a full game of that era to see it.

I've watched clips and games of that time period. While the average player doesn't compare that's not really the point, is it?

We're talking top 10 ever and you disqualified Wilt, Russell, West etc from the jump - not the role players

[Canadafan]

1-Jordan
2-Magic
3-Lebron
4-Bird
5-Kobe
6-Kareem
7-Shaq
8-Hakeem
9-Isiah
10-Duncan

Magic was the man. If he didn't have to retire early he might have got a 6th title

[In SVG We Trust]

1-Jordan
2-Magic
3-Lebron
4-Bird
5-Kobe
6-Kareem
7-Shaq
8-Hakeem
9-Isiah
10-Duncan

Magic was the man. If he didn't have to retire early he might have got a 6th title

My issue with Magic and Bird is they were in two of the best rosters of the NBA history. Of course a big part was because they were in those teams, but you can't compare one ring with Jabbar and Worthy with the Dirk 2010 ring. It's not even close in terms of difficulty and individual achievements. Same thing for Kobe with a pretty good roster but with Gasol as 2nd star, people use to say Shaq was the man, and he was, but he got a far superior 2nd star in Kobe than Kobe in Gasol.

I don't think all rings got same value for stars individual achievements. I don't like complains like when Cavs lost against GSW and was because the injuries... No, that was a legit ring as team, and this year with the injury of Bogut and Draymond suspension GSW fans complain too, but as a team is a ring no matter what. But if you're asking me, Durant winning the ring next season is far far away from the greatness comparing with this year LeBron's ring.

[In SVG We Trust]

Wilt, Russell, Cousy, Hav, Logo...

Role players?

No, I was talking about aside from the stars, the level of the league was pretty bad. You just need to watch a full game of that era to see it.

I've watched clips and games of that time period. While the average player doesn't compare that's not really the point, is it?

We're talking top 10 ever and you disqualified Wilt, Russell, West etc from the jump - not the role players

Well, imagine Durant this summer had signed with the Fenerbahce Ulker, and he wins 6 straights Euro-Leagues... But you know he is playing against inferior players than in the NBA. The opponent measure the size of your achievements.

[Manocad]

I've watched PLENTY of old NBA footage and there is no way I'd discount Wilt due to the era he played in. That guy was a friggin' stud. We're not talking 35 PPG/18 RPG vs. today's 35 PPG/18 RPG. We're talking 50/30. And he played into the '70's anyway. No way he doesn't make this list.

[In SVG We Trust]

I've watched PLENTY of old NBA footage and there is no way I'd discount Wilt due to the era he played in. That guy was a friggin' stud. We're not talking 35 PPG/18 RPG vs. today's 35 PPG/18 RPG. We're talking 50/30. And he played into the '70's anyway. No way he doesn't make this list.

How many prime Wilt games have you seen?

[Manocad]

I don't keep a ledger tally of basketball games I've watched. Mothers I've nailed, definitely.

This isn't a dick measuring contest. You can claim that the overall quality of NBA basketball sucked pre-1970 (you're wrong but I'll roll with it), but there is no logic to an argument that that means there couldn't have been any players who could have been stars today.

[In SVG We Trust]

I don't keep a ledger tally of basketball games I've watched. Mothers I've nailed, definitely.

This isn't a dick measuring contest. You can claim that the overall quality of NBA basketball sucked pre-1970 (you're wrong but I'll roll with it), but there is no logic to an argument that that means there couldn't have been any players who could have been stars today.

Wilt would be a great player today, don't get me wrong, and Russell too. Thing is they wouldn't be that dominant and they played against midgets compared with them and some fatherbody players.

[Manocad]

No one is saying they would be as dominant in today's NBA. How do we define "domination?" Stats, right? I'm talking simple comparative ability. Put it this way--would you say that Shaq could put up 50/30 in the 1960's? If you say yes then you're supporting my point.

[In SVG We Trust]

No one is saying they would be as dominant in today's NBA. How do we define "domination?" Stats, right? I'm talking simple comparative ability. Put it this way--would you say that Shaq could put up 50/30 in the 1960's? If you say yes then you're supporting my point.

I understand and respect your point, but I think rings since salary cap got more value. Yep, that's just my point of view, not as teams but for individual stars, I think it should be counted different.

[Manocad]

I have no idea what you're trying to say with that post.

[In SVG We Trust]

I have no idea what you're trying to say with that post.

You think a ring with a HOF line-up got the same value as one with only one more All-Star aside from you in your team?

[Manocad]

I have no idea what you're trying to say with that post.

You think a ring with a HOF line-up got the same value as one with only one more All-Star aside from you in your team?

What does a championship ring have to do with this discussion? I think Wilt belongs in the top 10 list of players since 1970 based on his abilities and you think he doesn't. End of story.

[Collymore]

I don't keep a ledger tally of basketball games I've watched. Mothers I've nailed, definitely.

This isn't a dick measuring contest. You can claim that the overall quality of NBA basketball sucked pre-1970 (you're wrong but I'll roll with it), but there is no logic to an argument that that means there couldn't have been any players who could have been stars today.

Quality basketball like this...

Watch on YouTube

[In SVG We Trust]

Khris Humphries would have been an absolutely beast and perennial All-Star playing before 1970. I don't know why people talk against the evolution.