Open Court: 50 Greatest & Next 10

MisterHibachi · Post #81 » by **MisterHibachi** » Fri Oct 10, 2014 1:18 pm

Who voted for the first top 50 list in 96?

Dmanning2 · Post #82 » by **Dmanning2** » Fri Oct 10, 2014 1:57 pm

Just keep in mind boys I watched the whole video the list wasn't in order

Post #83 » by **Clyde Frazier** » Fri Oct 10, 2014 2:28 pm

MisterHibachi wrote:Who voted for the first top 50 list in 96?

The list was compiled through unranked voting completed by fifty selected panelists. Sixteen of the panelists were former players voting in their roles as players, thirteen were members of the print and broadcast news media, and twenty-one were team representatives: contemporary and former general managers, head coaches, and executives. Of the last group, thirteen were former NBA players. Players were prohibited from voting for themselves. Only three voting veterans (Bill Bradley, Johnny Kerr, and Bob Lanier) were not selected to the team.

VOTER LIST

Spoiler:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/50_Greates ... BA_History

colts18 · Post #84 » by **colts18** » Fri Oct 10, 2014 3:28 pm

On the show, Chris Webber seriously tried to argue that he was better than Dirk :lol:

PCProductions · Post #85 » by **PCProductions** » Fri Oct 10, 2014 3:43 pm

Oh, and I forgot to mention how much of an ass Shaq is. This is a pretty good video if you want to convince someone of that, not that that person likely exists anymore after Inside the NBA now.

Post #86 » by **Clyde Frazier** » Fri Oct 10, 2014 4:28 pm

PCProductions wrote:Oh, and I forgot to mention how much of an ass Shaq is. This is a pretty good video if you want to convince someone of that, not that that person likely exists anymore after Inside the NBA now.

He pretty much ruined inside the NBA for me. I still watch it, but years ago when the show was in its prime, I planned my thursday nights around being home to watch it live. If webber replaced him, it'd at least make it more enjoyable to watch.

john248 · Post #87 » by **john248** » Fri Oct 10, 2014 6:04 pm

Aside from Shaq coming off as a child and the awkward voting for Webber, I don't see too much of an issue with the voting. It seems like they're far more likely to vote in guys from their own era and who got some hype during their time than to vote in others outside of that criteria. They also likely haven't actually sat down and poured over the stats to confirm their eye test.

Perkele · Post #88 » by **Perkele** » Fri Oct 10, 2014 8:02 pm

colts18 wrote:On the show, Chris Webber seriously tried to argue that he was better than Dirk

Webber looks so pissed :lol:

still so funny after all the crap Webber gave Dirk in 2011 and then looking like a chump in front of Dirk after he won the championship. just f**king priceless :lol:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TH8pWWLVPx8[/youtube]

ushvinder88 · Post #89 » by **ushvinder88** » Sat Oct 11, 2014 4:12 am

Chris Webber seriously tried to convince himself that he's better than Durant and Wade, lmao. He has at most 2 seasons where you can debate that he was a top 5 player in the league.

Ryoga Hibiki · Post #90 » by **Ryoga Hibiki** » Sun Oct 12, 2014 12:10 pm

I can understand why Webber believes he's on par with Dirk. But I have a problem with all these guys' skills as far as analysis and synthesis. The kind of reasoning you see here is 10x more convincing, unless you only rely on authority. Would be curious to here Riley, Jackson, Pop, Sloan, Don Nelson, West, Fratello, Brown etc have similar conversarions.

Masigond · Post #91 » by **Masigond** » Sun Oct 12, 2014 2:14 pm

Ryoga Hibiki wrote:I can understand why Webber believes he's on par with Dirk.

Sure: The two met in the playoffs three years in a row with the Kings coming on top twice quite comfortably (both times 4-1) while losing only once (3-4).
But I guess that he ignores that Dirk became even better in the following years, and that Dirk kept up playing on a way better level in his 30s when Webber was hampered by injuries.

Ryoga Hibiki · Post #92 » by **Ryoga Hibiki** » Sun Oct 12, 2014 5:02 pm

Masigond wrote:
Ryoga Hibiki wrote:I can understand why Webber believes he's on par with Dirk.

Sure: The two met in the playoffs three years in a row with the Kings coming on top twice quite comfortably (both times 4-1) while losing only once (3-4).
But I guess that he ignores that Dirk became even better in the following years, and that Dirk kept up playing on a way better level in his 30s when Webber was hampered by injuries.

To explain myself better, I understand why from HIS own perspective he should considered at the same level. It's very difficult to evaluate yourself, for the same reason I would understand Bibby or Parker believing their better than Nash.

Sedale Threatt · Post #93 » by **Sedale Threatt** » Sun Oct 12, 2014 8:25 pm

PCProductions wrote:Oh, and I forgot to mention how much of an ass Shaq is. This is a pretty good video if you want to convince someone of that, not that that person likely exists anymore after Inside the NBA now.

His quote from a spot for an upcoming Open Court episode: Analysis, Shmanalysis.

And this guy is paid big bucks to offer insight on the NBA.

AQuintus · Post #94 » by **AQuintus** » Sun Oct 12, 2014 8:29 pm

fpliii wrote:Only caught part of it. Not comfortable with AI being unanimous.

Same. I don't understand how they can have AI as an automatic in but then have a debate about Durant. Durant's pretty much matched all of AI's career accomplishments already, but he still has another 5-10 years left in him.

I can see an argument for the impact AI had on the culture of basketball, but that's it.

RSCD3_ · Post #95 » by **RSCD3_** » Sun Oct 12, 2014 8:42 pm

colts18 wrote:I love all the contradictory statements made by Isiah in that segment.

First he made a distinction between guys riding the car (the Man) and guys in the car (role players). He hated on Scottie Pippen because I assume he saw him as a #2 which is fair. But then he touts Bob Mcadoo for winning titles as a 6th man even though he was just along for the ride.

Then he proprs up Reggie Miller and Charles Barkley. He mentions that Indiana was nothing without Reggie Miller. Then he mentions that Phoenix was a bad franchise before Barkley got there even though they were a 50+ win team for 4 years straight before he got there.

It's amazing how he got multiple GM jobs and was hired as a head coach. Do owners actually listen to these morons speak before they hire them?

Yeah he also says he expects chalmers to score 16-20 ppg without the shackles of LeBron

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

RSCD3_ · Post #96 » by **RSCD3_** » Sun Oct 12, 2014 8:44 pm

D Nice wrote:Pretty sure the people moaning about Wade didn't even watch the segment. It was effectively 2 slots that were open, Kobe/Duncan/Dirk/KG/AI/Lebron were locks and McAdoo/Dominique were snubbed the first time around. This left 2 spots between Wade/KD/Webber, and Wade was actually put on the list at the end. They said they valued longevity and importance to the league, hence Iverson being a lock over Nash/Wade.

So if iverson wasn't a connoisseur of hip hop and urban culture he wouldn't be up so high

Serious question because in my opinion if he didn't represent the streets so much he wouldn't be as revered.

I mean when ever someone describes his basketball ability they just say he brought the streets to the game, and then his quick handle and acceleration.

I think his off the court persona mixed with his on the court swagger makes people value him more than what he was

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

D Nice · Post #97 » by **D Nice** » Sun Oct 12, 2014 8:45 pm

RSCD3_ wrote:
D Nice wrote:Pretty sure the people moaning about Wade didn't even watch the segment. It was effectively 2 slots that were open, Kobe/Duncan/Dirk/KG/AI/Lebron were locks and McAdoo/Dominique were snubbed the first time around. This left 2 spots between Wade/KD/Webber, and Wade was actually put on the list at the end. They said they valued longevity and importance to the league, hence Iverson being a lock over Nash/Wade.

So if iverson wasn't a connoisseur of hip hop and urban culture he wouldn't be up so high

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Yes, because that's exactly what I said.

Oh, and learn how to properly use "connoisseur."

Witzig-Okashi · Post #98 » by **Witzig-Okashi** » Sun Oct 12, 2014 8:46 pm

It's a bit disappointing with the lack of in-depth conversation, and the contradictory statements of some players (the majority on Nash, and Thomas' insistence on McAdoo despite his "riding the coattails" agenda he stated earlier in the program), but it isn't surprising. Most television shows primary goals are to entertain anyway. It's like looking at programs like FoxNews or CNN (to a lesser extent) for 'analysis' on speeches from pundits when you can look on C-SPAN unfiltered instead...Sorry, a bit of topic...

I don't think C-Webb was arguing that he was better than Dirk; he was just making a case that he was in the same tier as a guy like Dirk, which hasn't been the case for several years now. His '06 season alone was better than any C-Webb ever had, and Dirk is one of the more consistent playoff performers in NBA History. C-Webb's offensive impact can be overshadowed by his numbers, and the Kings didn't miss a beat with Brad Miller and Peja (among others) being the two most important players on those Kings teams when C-Webb was injured. Not to mention that Dirk has been a top 5-10 player far longer than C-Webb. Plus, Dirk wasn't at his best when C-Webb was at his peak in the early 00's.

Reggie excluded himself from the list, and although I respect it, I don't have a problem being a top 50 guy.

Wade being questioned from the top 50 was shocking. His dearth of longevity shouldn't preclude him from being top 50. I suppose one can make a decent argument for it being out of the top 25 (though I wouldn't make it), he's likely the 3rd best SG in NBA history.

Not going to get into too much detail about Iverson being unquestioned. This is geared toward the masses; should it be a surprise that Iverson wasn't going to be debated. I don't have a problem with him being top 50, but I loathe the notion that people analyze Iverson's career and think of '01 was something that happened for him every year. By the typical logic of his career, Kidd should have been unquestionably top 50, too (and he should be).

Nash is top 50 as far as I'm concerned, and Shaq sure as hell wasn't a MVP contender in '06. Nash won both MVP's out of 'sympathy' over you, Shaq, really? :banghead:

It's analyses like these that give credence to the idea that the "eye-test" is unreliable, when there should be some form of coalescence with watching the game with in-depth analysis (advance stat checking, etc).

RSCD3_ · Post #99 » by **RSCD3_** » Sun Oct 12, 2014 8:48 pm

Clyde Frazier wrote:
PCProductions wrote:Oh, and I forgot to mention how much of an ass Shaq is. This is a pretty good video if you want to convince someone of that, not that that person likely exists anymore after Inside the NBA now.

He pretty much ruined inside the NBA for me. I still watch it, but years ago when the show was in its prime, I planned my thursday nights around being home to watch it live. If webber replaced him, it'd at least make it more enjoyable to watch.

Shaq is decent when he is the leader and he has his yes man Dennis Scott or someone else who just agrees with him but when he's confronted he becomes this schoolyard bully from a TV show, so cartoony but not funny at all.

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Winsome Gerbil · Post #100 » by **Winsome Gerbil** » Sun Oct 12, 2014 9:01 pm

AQuintus wrote:
fpliii wrote:Only caught part of it. Not comfortable with AI being unanimous.

Same. I don't understand how they can have AI as an automatic in but then have a debate about Durant. Durant's pretty much matched all of AI's career accomplishments already, but he still has another 5-10 years left in him.

I can see an argument for the impact AI had on the culture of basketball, but that's it.

Well the Durant being midcareer seemed the pretty clear separator there the way those guys were approaching it. Basically as of today:

Iverson 24368pts
Durant 14851pts

So Iverson gets in, Durant is on the bubble. If Durant plays another 7 years and keeps on keeping on, then he's no longer on the bubble.