RGM Top 100 Vote Thread - The Greatest Player of All-Time

[Sedale Threatt]

Semi-interesting tidbit on Russell's supposed advantage in dominance over Jordan:

Boston was 27-2 in series throughout his career.

Chicago was 25-1 from 1991 on, with the only defeat coming in Jordan's abbreviated season.

Does 1991 have any significance other than that it was the start of Chicago's championship streak?

Nope. It's just one championship era compared to another.

Even if we add an additional season, when Grant and Pippen were still developing and Jackson was a rookie head coach, the Bulls still went 2-1 in series in the playoffs, and pushed one of the great ensemble championship teams to seven games (largely because of Jordan's brilliance).

That makes them 27-2 -- dead-even with Russell's Celtics.

[ThaRegul8r]

David Stern -- are you taking into account the fact that team rebounds were calculated differently in the 60s? If you leave this out, it underestimates the rebounding of players from those days. There is a nice post stickied in the Stat board about calculating rebound rate for players and it does Wilt and Russell. And yes, even using that system, Rodman still has the highest rebound rate, he was a freak of nature and probably the GOAT rebounder though Russell (and Wilt) can give him a decent run.

You missunderstood that stickied thread, if you think that proves Russell and Chamberlain were close. They weren't. Russell and Chamberlain managed around 20 TRB% in their best seasons, Rodman had 24+ TRB% 7 times! Russell and Chamberlain in terms of rebounding aren't better than Howard. There are more or less between Camby and Howard in terms of TRB% for their careers. That is an elite group, but not close to Rodman, who is clearly an outlier in that category.

I'm curious as to why you would choose Marcus Camby, as opposed to saying that Russell and Chamberlain both had higher career rebound rates than Moses Malone, who is an all-time great rebounder, unlike Camby. Reeks of agenda to me.

Not to mention that, in the case of Russell, who was mobile and went out to the perimeter to block and alter shots, intimidating the opposition, which took him out of rebounding position, as opposed to Rodman, who—when he became fixated on rebounds—would ignore his defensive assignment in order to stay in rebounding position.

[Bulls' coach Phil] Jackson says he has talked with Rodman about concentrating on rebounding to the extent that it takes him out of the flow of a game.

“It’s a passion for him, but sometimes a distraction,” Jackson says. “It borders on an obsession that can create an obstruction to a team. We always have to temper him as still being a part of the offense, even though you’re still doing your job—which is going to get rebounds. There are times when I’ve seen Dennis step from one side of the basket where his man is because the shot is there and he can get the high-percentage rebound. But the ball bounces right to his man for a layup. His instinct is to go to the high-percentage side to get that rebound.”

Rodman has been applauded for doing perhaps the dirtiest job in basketball: rebounding. Nobody has done it as well since Bill Russell. Rebounding is so important because not only does it give your team possession of the ball, it deflates the opponent. But only Rodman could take the ultimate team stat and turn it into a selfish act. Yes, Rodman is now as selfish as any unconscious gunner about to take his 30th shot of the game. You know who was supposed to be guarding Robert Horry, who hit the game-winning shot -- a wide-open 17-footer! -- for the Rockets in Game 1? Yes, Rodman. You know where Rodman was instead of guarding Horry? Under the basket plotting to get the rebound. Well, guess what? There was no rebound. If your job, with the game on the line, is to guard Horry but you're standing under the rim so that you can pad your rebound total, how much more selfish can you get?

Dennis was intent on getting every rebound, but he wouldn’t come out and guard anyone. That’s why Robert Horry killed us in that series. Dennis wouldn’t guard him!

I appreciated what Rodman could do, but this is absolutely inexcusable. The point of everything done on a basketball court is to help your team win the game. If what you're doing becomes a detriment to the bottom line of winning the game, then I have to question how valuable it is. If Rodman's is the GOAT rebounder, what does it mean when he does things like that? Now, I will say that Rodman's rebounding was vital in the '96 Finals against Seattle, and the Bulls wouldn't have won the title without it. Yet, as Phil Jackson said, he could go overboard. Sometimes he'd even fight teammates over rebounds:

When Atlanta Hawks guard Mookie Blaylock took the shot, Michael Jordan headed toward the basket. As the ball caromed off the back of the iron, Jordan attempted to snatch it out of the air.

Seemingly out of thin air came Dennis Rodman, fighting through two defenders to grab the ball. For a split second, there was a tug of war between the two teammates. When Jordan realized what was happening, he quickly released the ball, letting Rodman have his precious rebound.

“Dennis is going to get that basketball at the cost of pulling it away from his teammate sometimes,” Bulls coach Phil Jackson says.

So long as your team gets possession, it shouldn't matter. See, these are the kind of things that statistics don't cover.

(As as far as rebounding and shotblocking, how many players in NBA history blocked 3 or more shots per game while also grabbing 20% of all available rebounds since the NBA has kept track?

Bill Walton [1976-77], Shaq [1992-93], Dikembe Mutombo [1999-00], Ben Wallace [2001-02, 2002-03] and Marcus Camby [2005-06, 2007-08]. And we know that Russell and Chamberlain both did it.)

[Baller 24]

With all due respect to Bill Russell, whom I've learned to appreciate greatly as years have passed, I'm going to have to make my selection down between two guys: Jordan and Abdul-Jabbar.

I've been flip-flopping between the two, there's Abdul-Jabbar who's got nearly twenty years dominance, amazing peak-play, world's of accolades both offensively and defensively, while clearly being the best player in the league for almost a a good solid decade. Jordan on the other hand did the impossible at the time of his arrival, established the dominance of guard play, and at his utter most peak, was virtually unstoppable from even the greatest and physically draining defenses (Pistons/Knicks).

Jordan's got the statistical advantages of Wilt Chamberlain, the accolades of Abdul-Jabbar, with the mixture of dominance of virtually any other great player to play this game. His playoff dominance goes unspoken, throughout his 2nd three-peat he would consistently dominate teams with possibly three of the top five centers in the game at the time like Mourning, O'Neal, and Ewing. Jordan changed the game of how it was marketed, dominated his era better than possibly any player to play this game, and you can even say his abilities as a defender somehow anchored the perimeter defense of his Bull's teams along with his teammate Pippen. It's just incredible to see how well established those Bulls teams were on both the defensive and offensive end (at times ranking as the best in the league in both categories).

Vote: Michael Jordan

In terms of nominations ElGee really made me consider Karl Malone here, along with Dirk Nowtizki, LeBron James, Jerry West, Oscar Robertson, Julius Erving, Moses Malone and Kevin Garnett. Garnett's got one of the most dominant peaks, while defensively he's head and toes above every other candidate. LeBron is an interesting case, considering him and Karl Malone kind of have the same advantages and disadvantages, only that LeBron's peak is better, while Malone's got the career length as a dominant factor. I'm going to go with the safest pick and go with Kevin Garnett.

Nominate: Kevin Garnett.

[mysticbb]

I'm curious as to why you would choose Marcus Camby, as opposed to saying that Russell and Chamberlain both had higher career rebound rates than Moses Malone, who is an all-time great rebounder, unlike Camby. Reeks of agenda to me.

I picked two players with a similar TRB% who are playing TODAY. And Camby is listed with 19 TRB%, a similar rate as we get for Russell in other seasons (his range was between 18 and 20). That is my agenda. ;)

So long as your team gets possession, it shouldn't matter. See, these are the kind of things that statistics don't cover.

As a Bulls fan I know how Rodman got his rebounds, but I also know how Rodman played defense against bigger players in the paint. Anyway, but point was that Russell and Chamberlain didn't grab more rebounds in comparison to the amount of available rebounds than guys like Dwight Howard or Marcus Camby. We also know that players padded their rebounding stats by ignoring their defensive assignments, Rodman on the perimeter, Camby or Love underneath the basket. I give Bill Russell the benifit of the doubt here, because his teams were constantly great defensively with him. That is not true for Chamberlain.

Bill Walton [1976-77], Shaq [1992-93], Dikembe Mutombo [1999-00], Ben Wallace [2001-02, 2002-03] and Marcus Camby [2005-06, 2007-08]. And we know that Russell and Chamberlain both did it.)

Marcus Camby made that list while not being such a big factor defensively (the Nuggets actually played better defensively with their DPOY not on the court, their best defender in reality was Nene). I suspect Chamberlain had a similar approach as Camby, at least that's what I get from the footage. Impactwise I don't see Chamberlain's boxscore numbers translating to such a team success. A similar thing I suspect right now with Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, the team with and without him had a lower difference in MOV than I expected. It is interesting that in 1974/75 and 1977/78 this was rather around +8 for him, than the expected +10 or more like the superstars have today. Seems like I overrated Abdul-Jabbar's peak level impact a bit.

[ElGee]

Vote for a GOAT: Kareem Abdul-Jabbar

He's got it all.



Vote for a new nominee: LeBron James

Over the past four years, he's been better than anybody else left has been at their peak. He's got enough longevity and stats/accolades/awards to make this choice legitimate.

I've got LeBron right there, so this is less about him and more about Karl Malone. How bad do people think Malone's peak years were? This dude made 11 straight all-nba 1st teams and 14 consecutive top-10 MVP finishes (most since merger). Unless we are just being super big on peak play (and I love me some peak play), what's the issue here?

Personally, I'm looking at a pod of players including (better peaks:) LBJ, KG, Doc J (comparable peaks:) Kobe, Barkley, and probably West and Big O (maybe Dirk too). But compare them with Karl Malone and...I don't really get the argument.

Yeh, but so far the guys who look like they'll beat him out in the nomination are Dr J and Moses, and both have similar longevity, and superior peaks, so Karl can't hang his hat on outlasting them.

OK, so I have a question for the room then. How much weight do you put on peak? (I feel like I weigh it heavily, so I'm surprised to see people going further with it.)

In other words, as a thought experiment, which would you rather have?

Player A, who gives you 10 years of play at the following level (assume 10 is all-time GOAT peak):

7-7-7-7-8-8-8-8-7-7

or Player B, who gives you 6 years of:

7-8-9-9-8-7

?

(Or anything akin to that concept, really. The idea is, if the peaks are close, and one guy gives you a number of extra all-nba level seasons, who are you taking?)

@Ronniemac - I think James can clear everyone else BUT Malone, whose longevity advantage is astronomical, is it not? LBJ has 3 seasons he's clearly been better than Malone ever was IMO. Then you're basically talking about on order of 5-7 EXTRA better seasons for Karl when comparing the rest of their career. You don't want those extra MVP-candidate years to give you shots at a title? (Curious about everyone's take on this...)

[pancakes3]

at this rate, we'll have a new list by... 2017?

[JordansBulls]

OK, so I have a question for the room then. How much weight do you put on peak? (I feel like I weigh it heavily, so I'm surprised to see people going further with it.)

In other words, as a thought experiment, which would you rather have?

Player A, who gives you 10 years of play at the following level (assume 10 is all-time GOAT peak):

7-7-7-7-8-8-8-8-7-7

or Player B, who gives you 6 years of:

7-8-9-9-8-7

?

(Or anything akin to that concept, really. The idea is, if the peaks are close, and one guy gives you a number of extra all-nba level seasons, who are you taking?)

@Ronniemac - I think James can clear everyone else BUT Malone, whose longevity advantage is astronomical, is it not? LBJ has 3 seasons he's clearly been better than Malone ever was IMO. Then you're basically talking about on order of 5-7 EXTRA better seasons for Karl when comparing the rest of their career. You don't want those extra MVP-candidate years to give you shots at a title? (Curious about everyone's take on this...)

Peak and Prime are important, but it depends on how well you did during that time. I personally feel that Kareem from 1971-1974 (peak) was better than he was from 1975-1979.
Just like I feel MJ was better from 1991-1993 (peak) then 1988-1990.

How do you measure peak? Is it where you are statistically your most dominant or is it when you have your most success while being still the most statistically dominant in the league but not your highest dominance overall?

Also I'm curious on the Lebron nominations. Are people already putting him in the top 10 or so? I mean essentiallly there are 10 names on the list already and we are nominating Lebron already???

[Baller 24]

Voting will be ending tonight at 12AM EST. I'll have a new thread up shortly after that.

[penbeast0]

Nominations now are for people in the mix for 5-15, not unreasonable to put either leBron or Mikan in that group though I don't think either is in my top 10.

[drza]

OK, so I have a question for the room then. How much weight do you put on peak? (I feel like I weigh it heavily, so I'm surprised to see people going further with it.)

In other words, as a thought experiment, which would you rather have?

Player A, who gives you 10 years of play at the following level (assume 10 is all-time GOAT peak):

7-7-7-7-8-8-8-8-7-7

or Player B, who gives you 6 years of:

7-8-9-9-8-7

?

(Or anything akin to that concept, really. The idea is, if the peaks are close, and one guy gives you a number of extra all-nba level seasons, who are you taking?)

@Ronniemac - I think James can clear everyone else BUT Malone, whose longevity advantage is astronomical, is it not? LBJ has 3 seasons he's clearly been better than Malone ever was IMO. Then you're basically talking about on order of 5-7 EXTRA better seasons for Karl when comparing the rest of their career. You don't want those extra MVP-candidate years to give you shots at a title? (Curious about everyone's take on this...)

I'll speak specifically to the longevity argument, and specifically for Malone vs Garnett. I'm not comparing their total resumes or impact or stats or any of that, yet. This is purely a comment about Malone's longevity vs Garnett's.

That said, I don't see where Malone has a massive longevity argument over Garnett any longer. Malone got his first All NBA nod in 1988 and his last in 2001, a 14-year stretch of consistent front-end play.

Garnett's career, as always, is funky to characterize, but he got his first All NBA nod in 1999 and left Minnesota in 2007, a 9-year run of consistent All NBA-caliber player (again, I'm looking longevity only. I don't know how many times in their he actually was named All NBA, but that's a 9-year stretch where his play was All NBA-worthy). Then, Garnett has been in Boston for the last 4 years. And in the 4-year APM study that Engelmann is currently running, Garnett is in a virtua-tie for 2nd place overall (behind LeBron, "tied" with Nash, Dirk, Howard, Paul and Wade). Garnett only has one All NBA nod in that 4 years (though 3 1st team all defense nods), but to me that's another 4 years where he was playing all NBA-level ball whether it was recognized or not.

Does Malone have a longevity advantage over Garnett? Yeah, still, especially when you factor in his last few years were still really good without All NBA acknowledgment and also that he was playing more minutes at a later age than Garnett. But when you start talking 14 elite years vs 12, I don't think the gap is very big on longevity alone.

[pancakes3]

Player A, who gives you 10 years of play at the following level (assume 10 is all-time GOAT peak):

7-7-7-7-8-8-8-8-7-7

or Player B, who gives you 6 years of:

7-8-9-9-8-7

see, when i see that i'm thinking... Antawn Jamison vs TMac? TMac would win hands down.

[ElGee]

So it seems I'm not the only one with this same pod of players from about 11 through the teens. I'm not quite sure in what order to argue for/against them, but Dr. J and Moses seem hot right now.

Dr. J

I'm absolutely considering his ABA years here. My general stance on this is that the last few years of the ABA offered roughly equal competition to the NBA, although the ABA was a slightly smaller league, which J was a beneficiary of IMO. With that said, I have him as one of the 3-best players in the world in from 1973 to 1975, and I rewarded his 1976 nuclear explosion with my RPOY vote in 1976. (He averaged 35-13-5 and 2 blocks in the 76 PS)

At this point, I think it's important to put J's peak into context. I think it falls outside my 11 sacred peaks of all-time (MJ, Magic, Bird, Wilt, Shaq, Russell, LBJ, Duncan, Hakeem, Walton, Kareem). I'd also put it behind Garnett's, and then lump it in the next group -- maybe at the top -- of the Malones, Barkley, Kobe, West, Wade, etc.

Then J comes into the L in 1977, and many people somehow think lowly of him. For me, he was the 3rd best player on the planet that year, behind TWO sacred peak seasons (KAJ and Walton). Philadelphia jumped 3.5 SRS points and went from first-round fodder to the brink of a title (against an iconic team cresting in the playoffs). That occurred with the bad./redundant fit of having to play alongside George "the human turnover" McGinnis. J still played excellent defense, and in the playoffs raised his game significantly, averaging 27-6-5 on 58% TS.

Did he do the same stuff he did in the Finals the year before? Actually, almost! 33 in G1 (14-24, 5-5). A few solid games, and then with the series at 2-2, went for 37-9-7 (13-27, 11-13) and 2 blcks. In G6, dude did just about everything to keep Philly in it, going for 40-6-8 (17=29, 6-7). Sometimes, Bill Walton plays on the other team. (And again, the narrative if J switched to the NBA and won a title with such performances would have been lionized to Jordan proportions.)

I don't think he really ever played that well again, but man, in 1980 and 1982 he was right there. And the years in between are no slouches. (Note: That's a 10-year "prime.")

Moses

Now, compare that to Moses, a player I find a tad overrated. IMO 1982 is his peak season. I think his story of relevance starts in 1979. (Do people realize he was injured in 78?) He was good in 79, but how is that season much different than an early Karl Malone year? 1981 is another excellent year, starting his 3-year apex, but I find his 83 season to be overrated.

Hitting at the peak, Moses developed this little mid-range jumper. He was a warrior on the glass and powerful in the post. Never one to really pass much, it's hard to view his offensive game in the upper echelon of greats. Defensively, I also think he's not on the top line. Rebounding and blocks are there, but sometimes the rotations or lateral speed was not. This is a good peak, but I'd argue he reached his ceiling in 1982 and the 2 surrounding seasons were even slightly lesser.

What's interesting here, is that J is criticized for his impact entering the league, but it was far greater than Moses arriving in Philly, who took a 5.7 SRS team to 7.4, and one that lost in 6 games of the Finals to a white hot Lakers team, to winning the Finals.

After that, you never really have the same player again, and IMO what season post-83 would even be top-5? 1985 is the only one I see. I think longevity is a serious issue with Moses, but people are touting it like a strength.

(Note: That's about a 6-year "prime.")

[ElGee]

Player A, who gives you 10 years of play at the following level (assume 10 is all-time GOAT peak):

7-7-7-7-8-8-8-8-7-7

or Player B, who gives you 6 years of:

7-8-9-9-8-7

see, when i see that i'm thinking... Antawn Jamison vs TMac? TMac would win hands down.

When you see that you see a top-5 player with an all-time level peak vs. a guy who was probably never a top-30 player in the league at any point in his career?? I was trying to frame something of a little more relevance than Antawn Jamison. Think all-nba 1st-team vs. runaway MVP...

@drza Similarly, I was using the numbers to try and extend beyond all-nba teams. Not all all-nba team nods are remotely equal. You can have two guys on the same all-nba first team, one who is the GOAT peak player ever, and another who might be the 10th-best guy in the league that year.

Garnett's a great example. He makes all-nba 1st in 2000, but he's not as good as he would be in the next two years. I think it's around 01 or 02 we start talking about play comparable to the Malone Machine. Then he has his 03-05 peak. Judging 06-07 is tricky. 08, clear yes. But 09 the dude's injured, so that's out. 2010 he's hobbled a bit, but even in 10-11, I have a hard time placing him as a top-10 player, and therefore regardless of the accolades (let's say he had 2 more all-nba teams) those seasons aren't in the same ballpark as prime Malone seasons. I see, at most, 9 relevant seasons from KG there. (And by relevant I mean to this discussion, to "prime" seasons. KG's peripheral seasons still "count," but the impact they have on my team is hugely different as an all-star or even borderline all-nba guy compared to a top-3 or top-5 MVP guy.)

[lorak]

Chicago Tribune - Feb 8, 1997

Also offering his opinion of Rodman was Wilt Chamberlain, the greatest rebounder and No. 2 scorer in NBA history. Chamberlain and Magic Johnson are among several Hall of Famers who believe the presence of too many "specialists"--players who only shoot or rebound or defend is one reason why scoring is down and the game is slower. Rodman, Chamberlain said, "is a big rebounder. He does it better than anyone else out there. But I am amazed (at) guys who tend not to want to understand that playing the complete game is what the game should be about. "I remember Elgin Baylor scoring 45 and 71 points against us beating us and getting 18 rebounds. I'm not impressed with Dennis' 17 rebound average. He's not an all-around player. Why I like a guy like Charles Barkley so much is he gives his team whatever it needs at that time."

It doesn't matter because Rodman always had positive impact on his teams. The truth is that he was great rebounder but also very good in other aspect of the game.

[pancakes3]

Player A, who gives you 10 years of play at the following level (assume 10 is all-time GOAT peak):

7-7-7-7-8-8-8-8-7-7

or Player B, who gives you 6 years of:

7-8-9-9-8-7

see, when i see that i'm thinking... Antawn Jamison vs TMac? TMac would win hands down.

When you see that you see a top-5 player with an all-time level peak vs. a guy who was probably never a top-30 player in the league at any point in his career?? I was trying to frame something of a little more relevance than Antawn Jamison. Think all-nba 1st-team vs. runaway MVP...

i saw 7 and i though 20ppg ish or 10+ rpg ish as a guideline. i saw an 8 and i thought 25ppg or 12+rpg. i see a 9 and i think legit numbers. 30ppg, 14+ rpg. a 10 would be astronomical numbers like MJ, Shaq in 2000, Wilt, Kobe, KAj?

so yeah. antawn is swimming in a sea of 7's and has had 1 or 2 seasons where he had a decent peak. maybe Antawn is underselling it a bit. Zach Randolph maybe?

so you're saying an all-NBA guy who's never in serious MVP consideration vs a flash-in-the-pan MVP? Like... Chris Webber vs TMac? Well TMac's peak was so short that i think Webber would top him there. Another guy with a pretty short yet brilliant peak would be Nash, i guess. Pit Nash against another perennial all-NBA guy like... Pierce? Nash the flash would top Piece. no rhyme or reason really, just gut instinct.

[Baller 24]

What's the consensus here on Wade v West v Big O ? In terms of dominance and peak play, I consider Wade more valuable, with his two appearances in the Finals, both have been fantastic, one being an all-time great performance. He doesn't have the same length, but I can safely say that he's by a good margin considered the better player between the three. He's got the accolades offensively, defensively, and solid peak play that only a few other players can match.


EDIT: The more I look at it, the more I see how underrated this guy REALLY is. People don't realize how amazing of a player he is, he got robbed of an All-NBA First Team and an All-NBA Defensive First Team from Kobe Bryant (completely laughable & outragoues, but I guess it'll continue, even though Bryant is not an elite defender, or preimer first team player this past season).

[lorak]

What's interesting here, is that J is criticized for his impact entering the league, but it was far greater than Moses arriving in Philly, who took a 5.7 SRS team to 7.4, and one that lost in 6 games of the Finals to a white hot Lakers team, to winning the Finals.

It's easier to improve weaker team. You also have to remember that in 1977 Caldwell Jones also joined 76ers and he (with Dr J of course) was reason of Phily improvement.

[An Unbiased Fan]

How do you measure peak? Is it where you are statistically your most dominant or is it when you have your most success while being still the most statistically dominant in the league but not your highest dominance overall?

Also I'm curious on the Lebron nominations. Are people already putting him in the top 10 or so? I mean essentiallly there are 10 names on the list already and we are nominating Lebron already???

I'm wondering this too. We just have had a long thread discussing the merits of Russell's domination, and how his team impact was so important even without crazy stats...yet, now some want to put Lebron near Top 11, for a few years of ball-dominant stats, yet consistent under-achievement in the playoffs(a critique used against Wilt in this thread), including stats that dip bigtime against quality teams. How is Lebron even above a guy like Oscar who was the 60's version of James, yet showed he can produce over a long career?

The mythical "peak" of players, seems to morph from thread to thread, and isn't very consistent. I mean really, when was MJ's "peak"? Bird from 84'-86' was great, but his PER numbers are very pedestrian even during those 3 years, so how do we compare his peak to others? Many say Shaq had a GOAT peak, but he also had only 1 MVP during that period, no DPOYs, no All-D 1st, no rpg or bpg titles either. So are looking at Finals MVPs? What about Magic, or KAJ? I feel 2011 Dirk was a better basketball player than 2007 Dirk, because he has grown mentally, so when's his peak? How do we pin-point the peaks of Malone and Bryant, when they have such a huge span of elite years? How do we quantify guys like Nash & Isiah?

It's just seems so arbitrary to narrow player's careers down to a 2-4 year span, when most of these guys played 12+ years. Stats depend hevliy on the role a player has on a team, the system, the cast, and the state of the league. Someone really needs to explain how Lebron's "peak" was better than a Karl Malone for instance.

[An Unbiased Fan]

What's the consensus here on Wade v West v Big O ? In terms of dominance and peak play, I consider Wade more valuable, with his two appearances in the Finals, both have been fantastic, one being an all-time great performance. He doesn't have the same length, but I can safely say that he's by a good margin considered the better player between the three. He's got the accolades offensively, defensively, and solid peak play that only a few other players can match.


EDIT: The more I look at it, the more I see how underrated this guy REALLY is. People don't realize how amazing of a player he is, he got robbed of an All-NBA First Team and an All-NBA Defensive First Team from Kobe Bryant (completely laughable & outragoues, but I guess it'll continue, even though Bryant is not an elite defender, or preimer first team player this past season).

Both West and Oscar had more than double the elite years that Wade has produced. His performance against the Mavs in 06' was great...but it was the 2006 Mavs who were not a good defensive team. I don't see how one controversial performance against a weak defensive team, along with a 2011 series where he faded in the last 2 crucial games(which came after a bad Chicago series for him), somehow catapults him over the Logo & Oscar.

[penbeast0]

As a Bulls fan I know how Rodman got his rebounds, but I also know how Rodman played defense against bigger players in the paint. Anyway, but point was that Russell and Chamberlain didn't grab more rebounds in comparison to the amount of available rebounds than guys like Dwight Howard or Marcus Camby. We also know that players padded their rebounding stats by ignoring their defensive assignments, Rodman on the perimeter, Camby or Love underneath the basket. I give Bill Russell the benifit of the doubt here, because his teams were constantly great defensively with him. That is not true for Chamberlain.

Marcus Camby made that list while not being such a big factor defensively (the Nuggets actually played better defensively with their DPOY not on the court, their best defender in reality was Nene). I suspect Chamberlain had a similar approach as Camby, at least that's what I get from the footage. Impactwise I don't see Chamberlain's boxscore numbers translating to such a team success. A similar thing I suspect right now with Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, the team with and without him had a lower difference in MOV than I expected. It is interesting that in 1974/75 and 1977/78 this was rather around +8 for him, than the expected +10 or more like the superstars have today. Seems like I overrated Abdul-Jabbar's peak level impact a bit.

Like Rodman, Wilt was called out as well for refusing to guard players on the perimeter. Terry Pluto's "Tall Tales" talks about how he hated to play Clyde Lovellette who had a perimeter big man game and would just let Lovellette shoot open jumpers rather than waste energy and lose rebounding position chasing him around.

Rodman was great and if he hadn't been such an a-hole in San Antonio, he'd be in my top 50 easily. As it is, he still could be very easily; we will have to see how it plays out.

And, btw, as for Wade v. Oscar/Jerry, were his playoffs that much more impressive than West's (or Oscar's since one poster made some very nice points in the West v. O thread about Robertson being strong in the postseason as well though not with West's Mr. Clutch rep).