1. Kevin McHale
2. Nate Thurmond
3. Gary Payton
McHale - did everything you could want from a PF. He could score, he could rebound and is also one of the best post defenders of all time. He beat opposing bigs down the floor and had defensive versatility (at times would defend the 3, 4 and 5)..oh yeah and he won 3 championships, 5 NBA finals appearances. McHale had more effective post up moves than just about any player ever. Only other guys who really are in that conversation are Hakeem and Kareem.
Rebounding-wise he was excellent, especially considering he had to compete for rebounds with 2 other strong rebounders on his own team, Parish and Bird.
I think a good comparison for McHale is Pippen - it's pretty debatable IMO which was better. Both had really good team success while playing as the no. 2 guy alongside one of the best players ever (Bird, Jordan), both had good but not great longevity, both had a solid 3 or 4 years where they were arguably the best in the world at their position and a legit top 5 or 6 player in the league. McHale a better scorer, about even on D, maybe a slight edge on D for Pippen, Pippen did better as his team's no. 1 guy in 93-94 than McHale did in 88-89 but that was also post-surgery McHale playing in a more competitive league than Pippen played in 93-94. By 93-94 there was more expansion teams and the effect of all those additional teams was really starting to cause rosters to be more thin on talent.
Any case you make for Pippen to give him a small edge is canceled out by the fact that a) Pippen refused to go into the game in the final seconds of a crucial playoff game in 94 because his coach drew a play up for a teammate and b) Pippen selfishly sat out 1/2 the season in 97-98 because of a dispute with team management and c) Mchale was always a class act, teammates loved him, coaches loved him, respected by opponents and ALWAYS played, even if he was hurt like in the 87 NBA finals when he played through more pain than just about any player ever in order to try and help his team win a title. Pippen got voted in 14 rounds ago in this poll - how is it that Pippen got voted in 14 rounds ago yet McHale is still on the board? Recency bias.
McHale was not only versatile on defense (guarded the 3 at times with Bird guarding the 4, plus of course McHale guarded 4's and at times even guarded 5's when Parish sat down) but he also had the versatility of being highly effective in both half court offense and fast break offense. Everyone knows about his awesome low post moves in half court, but he was also excellent at running the floor in transition, beating his man down the court, out running and out working opposing bigs to get down court faster fopr easy buckets. Plus he hustled back on D to prevent fast break buckets by the opposition.
Plus McHale developed an effective outside shot in the mid range and even could hit 3's later in his career.
Let's compare McHale to Gasol, who's also getting some votes in this poll:
McHale was the better scorer by a decent margin and the better defender by a decent margin. Best post moves of any PF ever. More team success than Gasol, despite playing less seasons. And even though Gasol has a longevity edge, that edge isn't as significant when you consider his era was less physical, more days off in between games to recover, more advancements in nutrition, sports science, weight training, strength and conditioning, had better facilities, better equipment and even though he played more seasons, he did miss a ton of games during his career. In his 18 year career, Gasol played in 70+ games and 24+ MPG in the same season just 8 times. McHale did it 7 times.
1) Put Pau's Laker teams in the 80s and he wins 0 titles. Put the Bird/Parish/McHale Celtics in the 2000s and they win 5.
2) Range is comparable. McHale actually developed some really good range on his shot. Then again, it wasn't until both Gasol and McHale were past their prime before either of them really developed strong range, so not sure I would use that as much of a factor here. If we did factor it in, we'd have to account for difference in eras. By that I mean, Gasol simply had better range because in his era, that's the way the game was being played - especially from 2005 on - bigs had to be able to shoot from further away - and overall the entire league was shooting way more 3's than they did in McHale's era. It's like saying "Oh, Nash had better range than Isiah" well yeah no kidding! Look at the era they played in - nobody was shooting 3's in Isiah's era, when he was in college there was no 3 point shot - whereas Nash played in the era when the game revolved around the 3 and it was a much more emphasized part of the game.
3) Pau with superior passing to McHale? Eh, I don't see it as much of a difference there either. Maybe a slight edge for Gasol. The perception is that McHale is this black hole who never passes, but if you actually watch some of his footage you'll see lots of outstanding interior passing as well as good transition passing.
The slight edge Gasol has passing-wise can easily be chalked up to the fact a) he often times played in the high post where he could more easily see the entire floor, hit cutters or dump the ball in to a teammate in high post so it is less about him being a better passer and more about the way he was used on offense and b) he played in an era with less physicality and more floor spacing which makes it easier for him to make good passes whereas McHale played in an era with less spacing and more physicality, he gets the ball in the post with defenders draped all over him so all he could do is either kick the ball back out to the perimeter or try and score.
McHale is the better scorer by a decent margin and the better defender by a decent margin. 2nd best player on what many (including me) consider to be the greatest team of all time, the 86' Celtics. The year after that in 87, McHale finished no. 4 in MVP voting. Yes, despite the fact that he was on the same team as Bird (voted top 10 of all time in this poll, top 5 of all time according to many, including myself, coming off 3 straight MVPs), McHale was STILL top 4 in MVP voting that year. Pau played alongside Kobe, who was an MVP contender. Surely, if Pau is in the same conversation as McHale then Pau would have been an MVP contender while playing on the same team as Kobe (just like McHale was an MVP contender while playing alongside prime Bird), right? Wrong. This is Gasol while on Kobe's team:
2008 - no MVP votes
2009 - no MVP votes
2010 - no MVP votes (Chris Bosh, Stephen Jackson and Joe Johnson did get MVP votes though)
2011 - no MVP votes
2012 - no MVP votes
2013 - no MVP votes (Marc Gasol, Ty Lawson and David Lee did get MVP votes though)
2014 - no MVP votes
In fact, Gasol never once in his career got so much as one single point on the NBA MVP ballot.
McHale meanwhile got points in the MVP voting 3 times.
1986 - 13th in voting, 3 points
1987 - 4th in voting, 254 points
1991 - 19th in voting, 1 point
-McHale 7 all star games, Gasol 6
-Mchale 6 times on the all defensive team, Gasol 0
<br>
-McHale 1 time all NBA 1st team, Gasol 0
-McHale 0 times all NBA 2nd team, Gasol 1
-McHale would have undoubtedly made the all NBA 3rd team at least a couple of times but it didn't exist until end of Mchale's prime and after his foot surgery
-3 titles, 5 NBA finals appearances, 7 times in conference finals for McHale compared to 2 titles, 3 NBA finals appearances, 4 times in conference finals for Gasol
This gigantic edge in awards for McHale and going deeper into playoffs more times - despite the fact that he played 5 less seasons than Gasol.
Also keep in mind in 87 when Mchale had his best season - some even think he was even better than Bird that year - again, keep in mind this was Bird in his prime coming off 3 straight MVPs - yet in 87 McHale was seen by many people as just as good as Bird and seen by some people as even better. McHale was having his best season in 87, and the Celtics would have won the title but Mchale had a stress fracture in his foot as well as other key Celtics players who were hurt:
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1987-06-04-sp-4497-story.html</p>
There's little doubt in my mind that a healthy Celtics team wins the title in 87. Then we're talking about a guy in Mchale who was not only the 2nd best player on the greatest team of all time in 86, but if the Celtics were healthy in 87 and won the title, Mchale would have been arguably the best player on possibly the 2nd greatest team of all time. Keep in mind, Magic says that he thinks 87 was the best team his Lakers ever had. That tells you how good that 87 Celtics team was when healthy.
Playing most of the 87 season with that severe foot injury resulted in a shorter career for McHale and resulted in him being less effective in his later seasons, but that's the way players played in his era. They were tough and they played through pain. They were warriors. And McHale should be recognized for that, and not penalized.
Lastly, I don't think there's really much debate that McHale was arguably the GOAT when it comes to scoring in the low post / most effective post moves. Hakeem? Kareem? Who else is even in the same conversation as McHale when it comes to low post moves/low post scoring? Gasol, meanwhile…is there anything that Gasol is arguably the GOAT at? Of course not.
In this ESPN poll, released in 2016, Mchale ranks as the no. 6 PF of all time, ahead of Pettit, ahead of gasol and ahead of every PF who is still on the board for this project.
https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/page/nbarankPFs/ranking-greatest-power-forwards-nba-historyAlso in 2016, ESPN ranked McHale the no. 31 player of all time so I think it's about time we vote him in here as the no. 46 player.
https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/page/nbarank160201/all-nbarank-31-35Nate Thurmond - right in that same tier with Reed, Gilmore and Ewing. I see those four centers as pretty debatable. Ewing, Gilmore and Reed all got voted in already - it's Thurmond's time now. Thurmond has a strong case for being better than all 3 of them (probably the best defender of the group, but Gilmore has the longevity and ABA Finals MVP, Reed has 2 Finals MVPs so I've got Thurmond just barely ranked behind those other guys).
Thurmond is one of the most underrated players of all time and is top 50, no question in my mind.
https://www.nbcsports.com/bayarea/warriors/defensive-dominator-thurmond-one-nbas-most-underrated-all-timeThurmond went against Wilt, Russell, Chamberlain, Kareem, Unseld, Bellamy, Beaty, Cowens, Reed - all in their prime. Yet he still managed:
-7 all star games in 14 seasons
-2 times all defensive 1st team, 3 times all defensive 2nd team...despite the fact that all defense awards didn't exist until his 6th season! Clearly one of the best defensive players of all time and one of the best rebounders of all time
-Did not make a 1st or 2nd team all NBA (obviously those usually went to Wilt/Kareem/Russell) but there's very little question he would have made quite a few all NBA 3rd team selections if it existed back when he played
-Finished 2nd in MVP voting in 66-67, finishing ahead of Russell, Robertson and Barry - Thurmond finished no. 2 behind Wilt who was no. 1. Finished 11th in 69-70, 8th in 70-7, 8th in 71-72, 9th in 72-73 and 8th in 73-74
-Helped his team to NBA Finals in 67, where they lost to arguably the greatest team of all time, the 67 Sixers. That series Thurmond averaged 14 PPG and 26.7 RPG while playing 47 MPG, going head to head vs Wilt. Thurmond's Warriors fell in 6 games to Wilt's Sixers. Let's compare that to the Eastern Division Finals - Russell (while also going against Wilt) averaged less PPG (11) and less RPG (23) than Thurmond, and Russell's Celtics lost in 5 games to Wilt's Sixers. How did Wilt do in each series? His numbers. were better in the Eastern Division Finals, going against Russell than they were in the NBA finals vs Thurmond. Wilt went from 21 PPG, 32 RPG and 10 APG vs Russell down to 17 PPG, 28 RPG and 6 APG vs Thurmond.
Gary Payton - Billups just got voted in, but I have Payton ranked higher than Billups by a decent margin because Payton was a better scorer - better playmaker/facilitator - quicker off the dribble / better penetrator - more explosive as a threat leading the break in transition compared to Billups who walked the ball up the court - kept pressure on the defense more in the half court as well as opposed to Billups who simply brought the ball up and dished it off to the wing for a Pistons team that had a boring offense and lost in one of the most boring / unwatchable NBA finals of all time in 2005.
Scoring-wise, Payton averaged 20+ PPG 8 times. Billups did it 0 times.
Payton was a better playmaker. Payton averaged 7+ APG 11 times. Billups did it only 3 times.
All of these advantages Payton had as an offensive weapon, despite the fact that
a) Payton played most of his career (and his entire prime) before hand checking started to actually be enforced more in the 04-05 season - compared to Billups who played most of his career (and his entire prime) AFTER hand checking was enforced more
b) Payton played most of his career (and his entire prime) before defensive 3 seconds rule was introduced in 01-02 season which means Payton had a higher degree of difficulty to accumulate points and assists with opposing bigs clogging up the paint - compared to Billups who played most of his career (and his entire prime) AFTER defensive 3 second rule was introduced
c) Billups played in the era which was by far more "3 pointer friendly" with an increase in 3 pointers being taken during Billups' prime which resulted in a) Billups is naturally going to be a better outside shooter since that's the way the league had evolved in his era and b) more emphasis on 3 point shooting in Billups era = increased spacing = easier for Billups to have room to operate in the post, more space in the lane to dish off to teammates, simply easier to create offense and accumulate posts and assists than Payton had in a less 3 point friendly era
d) Payton played most of his career in an era dominated by big men (Shaq, Ewing, Robinson, Mourning, Mutombo, Hakeem, etc.) whereas Billups rise to stardom came precisely at a time when we saw a huge increase in smaller guards dominating the NBA (Nash wins 2 MVPs magically after being a bum his first few years - did he somehow turn into a better player, no rules changes and evolution of the game now favored point guards, Derrick Rose wins MVP, Chris Paul, Steph Curry,. Westbrook, etc.) the game evolved to favor 3 point shooting and point guards which made it easier for Billups to thrive
e) Billups played in a weak eastern conference, which typically only had 1 or 2 teams who were legit contenders compared to Payton who was battling it out every year in the 90s west which was insanely competitive (Suns, Rockets, Sonics, Spurs, Jazz, Lakers, Blazers and then you have the 91 Warriors and 94 Nuggets, it was a battle!)
Not to mention Payton was a far better defensive player to Billups. I mean, with Payton we are talking about arguably the best defensive point guard of all time. 9x all defensive 1st team, 1x defensive POY, 1x league leader in steals. Billups meanwhile made 2x all defense 2nd team and that's it - no comparison, it's apples to oranges.
The choice becomes even more obvious when we look at:
All star selections - 9 to 5 in favor of Payton
All NBA 1st team selections - 2 to 0 in favor of Payton
All NBA 2nd team selections - 5 to 1 in favor of Payton
All NBA 3rd team selections - 2 apiece
Not saying awards are the be all, end all, but it's hard to at least not factor them in when there's such a glaring difference between 2 players.
How about durability? After all, you're only valuable to your team if you can actually play and be on the court. Payton had 12 seasons with 78+ games and 30+ MPG in the same season. Billups only had 5. This category favors Payton even more if we take the lockout season of 99 into account - there was only 50 games and Payton played in all 50 of them, averaging 40 MPG, compared to Billups who sat out 5 games that season and also played less minutes (33 MPG).
Keep in mind, they both played exactly 17 seasons.
Billups was never really THE guy on any team. Those Pistons teams were truly an ensemble. They won with defense and Ben Wallace was obviously their best defender. Wallace was the guy they built that team around - not Billups. Wallace got to Detroit 2 years before Billups. The Pistons added pieces around Wallace who they fit fit that blue collar, tough, physical, defensive mold. Billups was a key piece but was really more of strong role player who had the luxury of moving the ball around, getting other guys involved and picking his spots here and there when he wanted to shoot. I mean, there was times when you could even argue that Billups was their 5th best player (since him, Hamilton, Prince and the 2 Wallaces were at times seen as interchangeable and brought relatively equal value) and if there was 1 guy. who was the most valuable to those Pistons teams, gun to your head most people are probably picking Ben Wallace. And Hamilton was often times their best scorer. Payton meanwhile carried the Sonics. He was THE guys. Yeah, maybe at time Kemp was their best player, but when you factor in not just scoring, but playmaking and defense, Payton was THE guy leading those Sonics teams, he had to be the one running the offense and carrying the load as a dual threat scoring/playmaking.
Payton was THE guy leading the Sonics, which was arguably the best team of the 90s other than the Bulls, year in and year out. Over a six-year span, the Sonics won 357 games and finished with the best record in the West four times, reaching the conference finals twice and the NBA Finals once.
Lastly, this article touches on why Billups is overrated:
https://bleacherreport.com/articles/157992-chauncey-billups-overrated-or-underrated
