Mt Rushmore of guards

[Ol Roy]

Thread title did not line up with the poll question and I noticed too late lol. I thought of it as greatest guards of all time, not who I'd build a team around. Some of those players are still way too young to know how great they can be.

He does that every time. It's so annoying.

[lonzo_pelota]

Jordan Magic Kobe Curry

[One_and_Done]

Thread title did not line up with the poll question and I noticed too late lol. I thought of it as greatest guards of all time, not who I'd build a team around. Some of those players are still way too young to know how great they can be.

He does that every time. It's so annoying.

To me it's the same question, because I only rank ppl based on how good they were at basketball in an objective sense.

[ReturnofMVP3]

Mario Chalmers, NBA champion. Without his beautiful orchestration of play making, LeBron and the Heat would not have won back to back championships. He cemented himself besides the like of Jordan and Jaylen Brown

[SNPA]

I wouldn't take them over any of these guys, including Harden and Ant.

You understand how shortsighted that is to not have Thomas, Oscar, West and Stockton on this list. It shows your lack of basketball knowledge.

No because those guys aren't that good. This is about who is the best, not who is the most famous.

lol.

Oscar played against plumbers!!!

(He happened to be 6’5’’ and built of solid rock and a world class athlete with immense basketball skills for a guard but besides that…)

[One_and_Done]

You understand how shortsighted that is to not have Thomas, Oscar, West and Stockton on this list. It shows your lack of basketball knowledge.

No because those guys aren't that good. This is about who is the best, not who is the most famous.

lol.

Oscar played against plumbers!!!

(He happened to be 6’5’’ and built of solid rock and a world class athlete with immense basketball skills for a guard but besides that…)

Oscar wouldn't be a top 10 player in today's league.

[rtiff68]

this is an atrocious list as it leaves off west, cousy, and oscar

btw,,,mt rushmore was hammered out in 1940's at least over a dozen years in the making, and if you haven't noticed no one has been added since it's completion. do you know why?,,,,BECAUSE IT'S MT RUSHMORE!!

and no one is changing the presidents' face on the $1, $5, or $10 either


it should be cousy,,,west,,,oscar,,,magic,,,mj

ant harden etal can be subway tokens though

Get off my lawn!!!

[Mr Puddles]

Career wise:

Jordan
Luka
Magic
Steph


If we're talking currently, Kobe replaces Luka but I'd be very surprised if Doncic hasn't overtaken him when all is said and done.

[benson13]

Jordan, Magic, Curry, and Stockton

I don't see John Stockton anywhere near the level of the other three, but the man is the all-time leader in the two stat categories guards are supposed to get. If that weren't the case I'd put Kobe, Isiah, or West over him.

[ChiTownHero1992]

Jordan, Magic, Curry and Kobe...that is pretty easy choice if you ask me

[chicago paxsons]

Thread title did not line up with the poll question and I noticed too late lol. I thought of it as greatest guards of all time, not who I'd build a team around. Some of those players are still way too young to know how great they can be.

He does that every time. It's so annoying.

To me it's the same question, because I only rank ppl based on how good they were at basketball in an objective sense.

There's nothing objective about the subjective question this thread asks.

There is no objective player rank since there is no way to objectively compare players who played in different eras under different rules and circumstances.

In fact, there is no true objective player rank of players who played in the same era because of the subjective opinion of skills, athletic abilities and circumstances that all effect a player's impact in a team sport.

If there were objective player ranks, then forums like this wouldn't be full of people arguing their opinions on players.

If you want to poll people's opinions then say that, but anyone including you claiming their opinion is objective is disingenuous and not arguing in good faith.

[Impuniti]

This isn't much of a competition, the main 4 is basically set and everything after is in the level below.

[One_and_Done]

He does that every time. It's so annoying.

To me it's the same question, because I only rank ppl based on how good they were at basketball in an objective sense.

There's nothing objective about the subjective question this thread asks.

There is no objective player rank since there is no way to objectively compare players who played in different eras under different rules and circumstances.

In fact, there is no true objective player rank of players who played in the same era because of the subjective opinion of skills, athletic abilities and circumstances that all effect a player's impact in a team sport.

If there were objective player ranks, then forums like this wouldn't be full of people arguing their opinions on players.

If you want to poll people's opinions then say that, but anyone including you claiming their opinion is objective is disingenuous and not arguing in good faith.

You can still try to be objective though, as opposed to abandoning that in favour of era-relativity assessments.

[SNPA]

No because those guys aren't that good. This is about who is the best, not who is the most famous.

lol.

Oscar played against plumbers!!!

(He happened to be 6’5’’ and built of solid rock and a world class athlete with immense basketball skills for a guard but besides that…)

Oscar wouldn't be a top 10 player in today's league.

Wrong.

[One_and_Done]

lol.

Oscar played against plumbers!!!

(He happened to be 6’5’’ and built of solid rock and a world class athlete with immense basketball skills for a guard but besides that…)

Oscar wouldn't be a top 10 player in today's league.

Wrong.

Aside from the fact that his advantages in today's more athletic and skilled league would stand out less, who would the prototype be for him to dominate as a guard with no 3pt shot?

[chicago paxsons]

To me it's the same question, because I only rank ppl based on how good they were at basketball in an objective sense.

There's nothing objective about the subjective question this thread asks.

There is no objective player rank since there is no way to objectively compare players who played in different eras under different rules and circumstances.

In fact, there is no true objective player rank of players who played in the same era because of the subjective opinion of skills, athletic abilities and circumstances that all effect a player's impact in a team sport.

If there were objective player ranks, then forums like this wouldn't be full of people arguing their opinions on players.

If you want to poll people's opinions then say that, but anyone including you claiming their opinion is objective is disingenuous and not arguing in good faith.

You can still try to be objective though, as opposed to abandoning that in favour of era-relativity assessments.

You can try, but with no tools/evidence that allow you to objectively compare players and eras, you won't ever have objectivity on the subject.

What's worse is that a person could convince themself that they have objectivity and end up believing their opinion is objective fact. Under those circumstances people blind themselves into ignoring every opinion but their own and look for echo chambers where people parrot only what they already believe.

[chicago paxsons]

Oscar wouldn't be a top 10 player in today's league.

Wrong.

Aside from the fact that his advantages in today's more athletic and skilled league would stand out less, who would the prototype be for him to dominate as a guard with no 3pt shot?

He'd be a better passing, shooting, defending, less turnover prone and higher iq russell westbrook. Basically take all of russell westbrooks flaws except a 3pt shot and remove them. That's oscar robertson.

[One_and_Done]

Wrong.

Aside from the fact that his advantages in today's more athletic and skilled league would stand out less, who would the prototype be for him to dominate as a guard with no 3pt shot?

He'd be a better passing, shooting, defending, less turnover prone and higher iq russell westbrook. Basically take all of russell westbrooks flaws except a 3pt shot and remove them. That's oscar robertson.

That player never existed.

[One_and_Done]

There's nothing objective about the subjective question this thread asks.

There is no objective player rank since there is no way to objectively compare players who played in different eras under different rules and circumstances.

In fact, there is no true objective player rank of players who played in the same era because of the subjective opinion of skills, athletic abilities and circumstances that all effect a player's impact in a team sport.

If there were objective player ranks, then forums like this wouldn't be full of people arguing their opinions on players.

If you want to poll people's opinions then say that, but anyone including you claiming their opinion is objective is disingenuous and not arguing in good faith.

You can still try to be objective though, as opposed to abandoning that in favour of era-relativity assessments.

You can try, but with no tools/evidence that allow you to objectively compare players and eras, you won't ever have objectivity on the subject.

What's worse is that a person could convince themself that they have objectivity and end up believing their opinion is objective fact. Under those circumstances people blind themselves into ignoring every opinion but their own and look for echo chambers where people parrot only what they already believe.

That's like saying you can't argue anything that isn't empirical in a persuasive way, which is clearly false. Might as well abandon most academia in that case, not to mention these forums. How can we discuss what the 'correct' moves are when it's not empirical.

[chicago paxsons]

Aside from the fact that his advantages in today's more athletic and skilled league would stand out less, who would the prototype be for him to dominate as a guard with no 3pt shot?

He'd be a better passing, shooting, defending, less turnover prone and higher iq russell westbrook. Basically take all of russell westbrooks flaws except a 3pt shot and remove them. That's oscar robertson.

That player never existed.

Are you saying oscar robertson is a figment of the imagination? Is this the mandela effect at work?