Which of these players is highest on your all time list?

[Warspite]

I will never understand the KG love here. His resume says he is a better Wes Unseld the tape says he is a better Rasheed Wallace.

For me its DrJ the best offensive and defensive player in the league. The guy who can take the worst team in the league and win a title with it. The guy who can win a title vs a team with 3 HoFers with no all-star teammates. Essentially the Lebron James of his era.
3 rings
4 MVPS
12 x 1st team
16 x all star
Historical figure that saved professional basketball and changed the way the game is played.

[One_and_Done]

I love Dr J, and think he'd be a big star today too. I'm not a fan of arguments that talk about 'historical significance' and which appear to ignore era differences.

[Red Beast]

I will never understand the KG love here. His resume says he is a better Wes Unseld the tape says he is a better Rasheed Wallace.

For me its DrJ the best offensive and defensive player in the league. The guy who can take the worst team in the league and win a title with it. The guy who can win a title vs a team with 3 HoFers with no all-star teammates. Essentially the Lebron James of his era.
3 rings
4 MVPS
12 x 1st team
16 x all star
Historical figure that saved professional basketball and changed the way the game is played.

I have to agree about the KG thing. I was a very big fan of his when he played. I would always hope that he would beat the Spurs or Lakers but I fail to see the logic behind his high rating on this board.

There are a number of players on the list that just have way too strong of an argument over him. In 12 years with the Timberwolves Garnett just couldn't raise his game to a high enough level. People will say that he had no help but I take issue with that. Firstly, he never had great teams, but some teams were decent. Secondly, when he lost he was generally outplayed by his counterpart, or was about the same. There were no losing series where he was the best player on the floor. That doesn't mean he is a bad player, but it does mean that he doesn't really belong in the very top tier of players all-time.

Think about some of the other players on this list.

Jerry West - West averaged 37.9 points and 7.4 assists in the finals against one of the greatest defenses of all time. He was also recognised as the best defender at his position at the time. KG never scored more than 35 points in any playoff game for his entire career.

Moses Malone - dragged a poor Houston team to the finals while outplaying Kareem (who won the MVP the previous year). He then was the best player of one of the most dominant teams of all time, sweeping the Lakers in the final. a 3 times MVP and the greatest offensive rebounder of all time.

Giannis - Averaged 35/13/5 in the finals scoring 50 points in the last game while playing all-time great defense. Again. KG never scored more than 35.

Dirk - Carried one of the worst supporting casts to a championship against one of the most talented teams of all time.

Again, KG is a great player, but he just didn't have it in him to lift his teams to the same level that others did. He was a key contributor to a great Boston team but he was never a dominant force that carried his team to victory. A similar thing can be said of David Robinson. But, how is Robinson rated lower than KG. They are probably close as offensive players with Robinson being a better scorer and KG better passer. However, Robinson is easily better defensively than KG. I just don't see how Garnett is better than David Robinson. Robinson progressed further in the playoffs than KG did with supporting casts just as bad as Garnett's.

I want to stress again, I rate Garnett very highly, I always liked him as a player, I always pulled for him to win. Everyone thought he was a great player at the time, no one thought he was close to top ten of all time. I've heard many rate him higher than Magic. This would have been thought of as crazy when he played or when he retired and it is crazy now. If you watched both play you would recognise the difference in levels.

[migya]

I will never understand the KG love here. His resume says he is a better Wes Unseld the tape says he is a better Rasheed Wallace.

For me its DrJ the best offensive and defensive player in the league. The guy who can take the worst team in the league and win a title with it. The guy who can win a title vs a team with 3 HoFers with no all-star teammates. Essentially the Lebron James of his era.
3 rings
4 MVPS
12 x 1st team
16 x all star
Historical figure that saved professional basketball and changed the way the game is played.

I have to agree about the KG thing. I was a very big fan of his when he played. I would always hope that he would beat the Spurs or Lakers but I fail to see the logic behind his high rating on this board.

There are a number of players on the list that just have way too strong of an argument over him. In 12 years with the Timberwolves Garnett just couldn't raise his game to a high enough level. People will say that he had no help but I take issue with that. Firstly, he never had great teams, but some teams were decent. Secondly, when he lost he was generally outplayed by his counterpart, or was about the same. There were no losing series where he was the best player on the floor. That doesn't mean he is a bad player, but it does mean that he doesn't really belong in the very top tier of players all-time.

Think about some of the other players on this list.

Jerry West - West averaged 37.9 points and 7.4 assists in the finals against one of the greatest defenses of all time. He was also recognised as the best defender at his position at the time. KG never scored more than 35 points in any playoff game for his entire career.

Moses Malone - dragged a poor Houston team to the finals while outplaying Kareem (who won the MVP the previous year). He then was the best player of one of the most dominant teams of all time, sweeping the Lakers in the final. a 3 times MVP and the greatest offensive rebounder of all time.

Giannis - Averaged 35/13/5 in the finals scoring 50 points in the last game while playing all-time great defense. Again. KG never scored more than 35.

Dirk - Carried one of the worst supporting casts to a championship against one of the most talented teams of all time.

Again, KG is a great player, but he just didn't have it in him to lift his teams to the same level that others did. He was a key contributor to a great Boston team but he was never a dominant force that carried his team to victory. A similar thing can be said of David Robinson. But, how is Robinson rated lower than KG. They are probably close as offensive players with Robinson being a better scorer and KG better passer. However, Robinson is easily better defensively than KG. I just don't see how Garnett is better than David Robinson. Robinson progressed further in the playoffs than KG did with supporting casts just as bad as Garnett's.

I want to stress again, I rate Garnett very highly, I always liked him as a player, I always pulled for him to win. Everyone thought he was a great player at the time, no one thought he was close to top ten of all time. I've heard many rate him higher than Magic. This would have been thought of as crazy when he played or when he retired and it is crazy now. If you watched both play you would recognise the difference in levels.

Well said, hat's off.

This last year I have come to appreciate Garnett more and rate him higher alltime, close to top 15, because as many here have lauded for years, he did the little things that make a difference, but yea, he was not a player to build a winner around. The comparison to Robinson to me is a good one. Robinson rampaged on both ends in the 90s until 99, when he gratiously stepped to the side so Duncan could lead. He is a top 10, really top 5 defender ever and scored a heap, quite unstoppable during that time. Garnett just wasn't a top scorer. He couldn't lead a team that way. He faltered much, as did Robinson, in the playoffs, but Robinson's ability to protect the rim made him valuable.

With very good scorers around him, like in Boston, Garnett shined to his strengths. Give Robinson that supporting cast and he wins at least three championships in the Jordan and Olajuwon era and he'd be known as a top ten player ever.

Moses beating Lakers in 81 is close to the greatest upset and carry job ever. The man was a force that is probably unmatched at his height going against much bigger stars.

[OhayoKD]

Well that's what you might do. Some people choose to take a different view of things because they don't want an individual's greatness to be determined by surrounding context they have no control over.

The problem with this approach is that you can end of using it to rate guys like Len Bias in the top 50. Ultimately you have to judge players off what actually happened. That doesn't mean we can't apply context, but giving a guy skills or durability or achievements he never had is where you lose me.You have to defer somewhat to what actually happened.

Can it?

[CodeBreaker]

not KD

[Jaivl]

There are a number of players on the list that just have way too strong of an argument over him. In 12 years with the Timberwolves Garnett just couldn't raise his game to a high enough level. People will say that he had no help but I take issue with that. Firstly, he never had great teams, but some teams were decent. Secondly, when he lost he was generally outplayed by his counterpart, or was about the same. There were no losing series where he was the best player on the floor.

I'd say he was easily the best player on the 04 Lakers series, and arguably on 2000 and 2003 (lean TD but it's close). Haven't watched 1999 or 2001.

When your counterparts are Shaq, Duncan and Dirk, "about the same" is very high praise.

[Red Beast]

There are a number of players on the list that just have way too strong of an argument over him. In 12 years with the Timberwolves Garnett just couldn't raise his game to a high enough level. People will say that he had no help but I take issue with that. Firstly, he never had great teams, but some teams were decent. Secondly, when he lost he was generally outplayed by his counterpart, or was about the same. There were no losing series where he was the best player on the floor.

I'd say he was easily the best player on the 04 Lakers series, and arguably on 2000 and 2003 (lean TD but it's close). Haven't watched 1999 or 2001.

When your counterparts are Shaq, Duncan and Dirk, "about the same" is very high praise.

He was good in 04, not great and not easily the best player. In the elimination game he scored 22 points with 8 turnovers and took less shots than Sprewell. I'm not saying he was terrible but that's not really going down in a blaze of glory. He definitely was not the best player in 2000 (Shaq was dominant) or 2003.

Look, KG was a great player, I'm not saying he was bad, but there are just no performances where he dominated in the same way that others did. In my opinion, and others may disagree, to be considered the best of the best, you need to have those games, or series, where you are dominant. Look at Jokic at the moment. KG has never had a series close to what he is doing. Shaq, Duncan and Dirk all had those series where they were dominant and outplayed their opponent. Remember when Magic hit the game winner on the baby hook against the Celtics? In the press conference afterwards, Bird said that Magic was the greatest player he had ever seen and he didn't know what to say. These are the reactions people have to the best of the best. Remember Hakeem destroying Robinson, or shutting down Ewing defensively? In a losing effort against Seattle in an elimination game Hakeem had 49 points 25 rebounds and 6 blocks. That's going out in a blaze of glory!

[Jaivl]

There are a number of players on the list that just have way too strong of an argument over him. In 12 years with the Timberwolves Garnett just couldn't raise his game to a high enough level. People will say that he had no help but I take issue with that. Firstly, he never had great teams, but some teams were decent. Secondly, when he lost he was generally outplayed by his counterpart, or was about the same. There were no losing series where he was the best player on the floor.

I'd say he was easily the best player on the 04 Lakers series, and arguably on 2000 and 2003 (lean TD but it's close). Haven't watched 1999 or 2001.

When your counterparts are Shaq, Duncan and Dirk, "about the same" is very high praise.

He was good in 04, not great and not easily the best player. In the elimination game he scored 22 points with 8 turnovers and took less shots than Sprewell. I'm not saying he was terrible but that's not really going down in a blaze of glory. He definitely was not the best player in 2000 (Shaq was dominant) or 2003.

Look, KG was a great player, I'm not saying he was bad, but there are just no performances where he dominated in the same way that others did. In my opinion, and others may disagree, to be considered the best of the best, you need to have those games, or series, where you are dominant. Look at Jokic at the moment. KG has never had a series close to what he is doing. Shaq, Duncan and Dirk all had those series where they were dominant and outplayed their opponent. Remember when Magic hit the game winner on the baby hook against the Celtics? In the press conference afterwards, Bird said that Magic was the greatest player he had ever seen and he didn't know what to say. These are the reactions people have to the best of the best. Remember Hakeem destroying Robinson, or shutting down Ewing defensively? In a losing effort against Seattle in an elimination game Hakeem had 49 points 25 rebounds and 6 blocks. That's going out in a blaze of glory!

Let's just say framing the slogfest that was G6 in that way is fishy, and I'm on a extremely hard disagreement against your take on the series overall. I don't think it's close re/ KG being the best player there, really.

Btw, Minny lost against Portland in 2000, not Lakers, of course he isn't better than Shaq in 2000.

[Red Beast]

I'd say he was easily the best player on the 04 Lakers series, and arguably on 2000 and 2003 (lean TD but it's close). Haven't watched 1999 or 2001.

When your counterparts are Shaq, Duncan and Dirk, "about the same" is very high praise.

He was good in 04, not great and not easily the best player. In the elimination game he scored 22 points with 8 turnovers and took less shots than Sprewell. I'm not saying he was terrible but that's not really going down in a blaze of glory. He definitely was not the best player in 2000 (Shaq was dominant) or 2003.

Look, KG was a great player, I'm not saying he was bad, but there are just no performances where he dominated in the same way that others did. In my opinion, and others may disagree, to be considered the best of the best, you need to have those games, or series, where you are dominant. Look at Jokic at the moment. KG has never had a series close to what he is doing. Shaq, Duncan and Dirk all had those series where they were dominant and outplayed their opponent. Remember when Magic hit the game winner on the baby hook against the Celtics? In the press conference afterwards, Bird said that Magic was the greatest player he had ever seen and he didn't know what to say. These are the reactions people have to the best of the best. Remember Hakeem destroying Robinson, or shutting down Ewing defensively? In a losing effort against Seattle in an elimination game Hakeem had 49 points 25 rebounds and 6 blocks. That's going out in a blaze of glory!

Let's just say framing the slogfest that was G6 in that way is fishy, and I'm on a extremely hard disagreement against your take on the series overall. I don't think it's close re/ KG being the best player there, really.

Btw, Minny lost against Portland in 2000, not Lakers, of course he isn't better than Shaq in 2000.

Apologies got my series wrong. Against Portland in 2000 he averaged 18 points a game (less than Terrell Brandon) on .385 shooting. That's not impressive. In term of '04, I stated that he was good. My issue is with your statement that he was "easily" the best player. Shaq averaged 20.7/15.7/2.8 with 3 blocks a game on .569 shooting. He also shot 93 free throws (didn't make many) in a 7 game series which puts a lot of pressure on a defense. Garnett averaged 23.7/13.5/4.5 with 1.2 blocks on .463 shooting. You can argue that it is better, but you can't really argue that it is easily better.

[LukaTheGOAT]

There are a number of players on the list that just have way too strong of an argument over him. In 12 years with the Timberwolves Garnett just couldn't raise his game to a high enough level. People will say that he had no help but I take issue with that. Firstly, he never had great teams, but some teams were decent. Secondly, when he lost he was generally outplayed by his counterpart, or was about the same. There were no losing series where he was the best player on the floor.

I'd say he was easily the best player on the 04 Lakers series, and arguably on 2000 and 2003 (lean TD but it's close). Haven't watched 1999 or 2001.

When your counterparts are Shaq, Duncan and Dirk, "about the same" is very high praise.

Garnett is not talked about the same as Dirk, but rather he is consistently put well above Dirk on this forum.

Also, if we are doing head-to-head comparisons, I think a good argument can be made he was handily outplayed by Dirk in 02.

[ceoofkobefans]

Ranking them (all time rank)

1. KG (10)
2. Oscar (15)
3. KD (18)
4. West (19)
5. DR J (20)
6. Drob (21)
7. Wade (22)
8. Moses (26)
9. Giannis (33?)

Most of these guys are really close and I could see some over the others.

[One_and_Done]

Ranking them (all time rank)

1. KG (10)
2. Oscar (15)
3. KD (18)
4. West (19)
5. DR J (20)
6. Drob (21)
7. Wade (22)
8. Moses (26)
9. Giannis (33?)

Most of these guys are really close and I could see some over the others.

I haven't thought about a top 30 enough to give numbers, but I'd rank them:

KG (top 10ish)
KD (top 10ish)
Dr J (top 15ish)
D.Rob (top 20ish)
Giannis (top 20ish)
Wade (top 25ish)
Moses (top 25ish)
Oscar (top 25ish)
West