Top 10 Players of All-Time by Kuroism

[Collymore]

MVP 10p, FMVP 5p, DPOY 5p, all-star 2p, all-defensive team 2p, title 0.5p. Adjust individual awards by number of players in the league, adjust titles by number of teams in the league.

[StMikes31]

The majority of the league wasn't as tall as those guys were. The guy was averaging 50 points and 20 reb a game (wilt) against guys much smaller then him. Me and you could do that if we were 7 feet tall with guys who are 6'7-6'8 playing the centre position. I'm not saying he wasn't a good player, he definitely was, I'm just saying he's a bit overrated.

Wilt was 7'1, Russell was 6'10.

The average height for a center in the 60's was 6'10.

The more you know...

What's you're point? The majority of those guys anyway didn't have the same amount of talent as NBA bigs do now or even back in the 80's and 90's. Put Shaq and Kareem in that era and they would dominate even more. My point is putting Wilt or Russel in today's NBA wouldn't make them average 50pts and 20reb. Thus, those stats are overrated especially when you are comparing them to guys like Hakeem, Shaq, Kareem. They would be good players but not great. That's why that system the OP is using is completely false imo.

[MannyRam99]

MVP 10p, FMVP 5p, DPOY 5p, all-star 2p, all-defensive team 2p, title 0.5p. Adjust individual awards by number of players in the league, adjust titles by number of teams in the league.

10p for regular season MVPs but only 5p for FMVPs ???

agenda much ?

[Josephpaul]

The PC guys would go ape crap over this haha

[smith2373]

The majority of the league wasn't as tall as those guys were. The guy was averaging 50 points and 20 reb a game (wilt) against guys much smaller then him. Me and you could do that if we were 7 feet tall with guys who are 6'7-6'8 playing the centre position. I'm not saying he wasn't a good player, he definitely was, I'm just saying he's a bit overrated.

Wilt was 7'1, Russell was 6'10.

The average height for a center in the 60's was 6'10.

The more you know...

What's you're point? The majority of those guys anyway didn't have the same amount of talent as NBA bigs do now or even back in the 80's and 90's. Put Shaq and Kareem in that era and they would dominate even more. My point is putting Wilt or Russel in today's NBA wouldn't make them average 50pts and 20reb. Thus, those stats are overrated especially when you are comparing them to guys like Hakeem, Shaq, Kareem. They would be good players but not great. That's why that system the OP is using is completely false imo.

You said the majority of centers were 6'7 that's why Wilt put up those numbers when the average height for a center back then is the same height as a center nowadays.

And if height matters so much, like another guy said. Why didn't Gheorge Mhuresan & Manute Bol put up numbers like Wilt & Russell did in the 90's?

Wilt averaged 50/26 in one season and yeah I'm sure Shaq or Kareem are capable of having a 50/26 or 45/24 season during the 60's but I also think that Wilt at his peak could put up a 30/14 or 29/13 in a season during the mid to late 90's and early 2000's like Shaq did or maybe even more then those numbers.

[Collymore]

MVP 10p, FMVP 5p, DPOY 5p, all-star 2p, all-defensive team 2p, title 0.5p. Adjust individual awards by number of players in the league, adjust titles by number of teams in the league.

10p for regular season MVPs but only 5p for FMVPs ???

agenda much ?

Isn't it rather obvious that an award based on a 82 games and players from 30 teams is more worth than an award over 4 to 7 games and in effect players from one team. If it wasn't something big at stake it would have been worth like 0.5p. Or do you consider Chauncy as a better player than KG in 04?

[MannyRam99]

MVP 10p, FMVP 5p, DPOY 5p, all-star 2p, all-defensive team 2p, title 0.5p. Adjust individual awards by number of players in the league, adjust titles by number of teams in the league.

10p for regular season MVPs but only 5p for FMVPs ???

agenda much ?

Isn't it rather obvious that an award based on a 82 games and players from 30 teams is more worth than an award over 4 to 7 games and in effect players from one team. If it wasn't something big at stake it would have been worth like 0.5p. Or do you consider Chauncy as a better player than KG in 04?

Although the 4 to 7 sample size may be small, it is the biggest stage and the whole point of the season. Don't you think it should be ranked at least just as heavily as reg. MVP ?

I've watched Dirk receive MVP and then completely collapse in the playoffs, where he was basically exposed. I value FMVP more.

regular season MVP = media's valuable player.

[druggas]

The majority of the league wasn't as tall as those guys were. The guy was averaging 50 points and 20 reb a game (wilt) against guys much smaller then him. Me and you could do that if we were 7 feet tall with guys who are 6'7-6'8 playing the centre position. I'm not saying he wasn't a good player, he definitely was, I'm just saying he's a bit overrated.

Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.

[TylerTheDebater]

Chance the points for NBA Title to 6 points for best player, 3 points for 2nd best player.

[Tolverines]

You said the majority of centers were 6'7 that's why Wilt put up those numbers when the average height for a center back then is the same height as a center nowadays.

And if height matters so much, like another guy said. Why didn't Gheorge Mhuresan & Manute Bol put up numbers like Wilt & Russell did in the 90's?

Wilt averaged 50/26 in one season and yeah I'm sure Shaq or Kareem are capable of having a 50/26 or 45/24 season during the 60's but I also think that Wilt at his peak could put up a 30/14 or 29/13 in a season during the mid to late 90's and early 2000's like Shaq did or maybe even more then those numbers.

The only thing I ask of folks who think the great 60s players would dominate today's game is to ask them to find me a video of Wilt doing something that KG is incapable of or find me a video of Bill doing something Tyson Chandler is incapable of. These guys weren't that special, they were extraordinary, if not out-of-worldly, relative to their own era, but they don't really impress me. Wilt's athletic abilities always get talked about, but I don't see them translating on the floor. Hell, some of Dwight's blocks and dunks make Wilt look unathletic, and apparently Wilt was miles ahead of Howard in terms of athleticism. I only see very simply dunks from Wilt, and very fundamental (but easy blocks) from Bill. There is nothing that makes my jaw drop, ever. And I know all the 60s pushers know that, there is nothing Wilt or Russell has done that have made their jaws drop, but for some reason, they are still better than anyone today, while almost everything in the weekly top 10 has something that has made them go, "Wow, I did not think that was humanely possible."