RealGM

This isn't about longevity. But strictly if you played at least 3+ seasons

Feel free to power rank them as well

If it’s best 3 years, this is Drob for me.

A really close race between Robinson, Barkley and Malone.

Don't think it should be limited to Orlando Shaq here.

I have Robinson edging out Shaq for the #3 spot for 90s prime.

Honestly? Shaq. Specially if we include his late 90's laker years then robinson

Virtual tie for me between barkley, malone and maybe reggie/ewing

Drexler/scottie after those 4 i suppose. Leaning scottie (actually i feel like scottie may belong closer to the 4 guys above him than drexler?)

This is all off the hip tbh, have not thought it too much

The 90's were a tough era for big men. Its close between D Robinson, Malone and La Shaq. Orlando Shaq was no joke but the vets put it on him. Robinson and its not even close. The championships only add to the difference, with or without Duncan. Teams play a big role in relevancy.

this is Drob by a good margin. Aside from the 1 year injury, he was consistently amazing the entire decade. I'm an aggregate value guy. Somebody might prefer Shaq's or Barkley's PS runs though

Karl Malone by a lot.

All-NBA 1st every season
2 MVPs
6 Top MVP finishes
2 NBA Finals

mdonnelly1989 wrote:This isn't about longevity. But strictly if you played at least 3+ seasons

Feel free to power rank them as well

You again assume things that may or may not be true. Jordan is most likely the best player of the 90s but Hakeem, while great, may or may not be 2nd over a 3 season stretch. Please stop stating your hot takes as if they were facts though this is closer to conventional wisdom than many of your OPs.

^ It is a lot easier to argue that 1993-95 Hakeem has a better three-year stretch than any of Jordan’s in the 1990s than it is to argue he was not at least second. Sounds like you are the one with the nuclear hot take, not OP, which makes it all the weirder to scold him for it.

One has to wonder how different things would look if MJ took 97 & 98 off, as opposed to 94 & 95

AEnigma wrote:^ It is a lot easier to argue that 1993-95 Hakeem has a better three-year stretch than any of Jordan’s in the 1990s than it is to argue he was not at least second. Sounds like you are the one with the nuclear hot take, not OP, which makes it all the weirder to scold him for it.

It depends on how you rank postseason v. regular season. And while I agree with this particular ranking; it's just that OP has done this many many times, stating his opinions as to who the best are and asking for the next few and has been asked not to make these assumptions many times as well.

Karl Malone.

Don't see how it isn't Karl Malone. He beat Robinson head to head several times without HCA, He beat Shaq, Hakeem in back to back series in multiple years.

Shaq
Malone
Robinson
Barkely
Ewing
Pippen

Interesting that its mostly big men. Golden era of bigs really. Should we question the quality of perimeter play in the 90s???? Has there been another era this top heavy with bigmen as the best players?

penbeast0 wrote:

mdonnelly1989 wrote:This isn't about longevity. But strictly if you played at least 3+ seasons

Feel free to power rank them as well

You again assume things that may or may not be true. Jordan is most likely the best player of the 90s but Hakeem, while great, may or may not be 2nd over a 3 season stretch. Please stop stating your hot takes as if they were facts though this is closer to conventional wisdom than many of your OPs.

You really going to get that salty over a Forum online lol. In the grand scheme it really isn't a big deal.

An Unbiased Fan wrote:One has to wonder how different things would look if MJ took 97 & 98 off, as opposed to 94 & 95

Yeah, losing to Rockets could make a difference for MJ

70sFan wrote:

An Unbiased Fan wrote:One has to wonder how different things would look if MJ took 97 & 98 off, as opposed to 94 & 95

Yeah, losing to Rockets could make a difference for MJ

Facing the 94 Knicks is totally like playing what the 94 Bulls would have been........

An Unbiased Fan wrote:

70sFan wrote:

An Unbiased Fan wrote:One has to wonder how different things would look if MJ took 97 & 98 off, as opposed to 94 & 95

Yeah, losing to Rockets could make a difference for MJ

Facing the 94 Knicks is totally like playing what the 94 Bulls would have been........

No, it's not the same. That's why you shouldn't take Bulls win for granted.

I don't see how you could take Robinson or Malone here unless you value the post-season as much as pre-season. To me this is clearly Barkley.