RealGM Top 100 All-Time List

[TMACFORMVP]

LOL, you're a joke dude. Oakley is one of my FAVORITE role players of all time, seriously, I love his toughness, his tenacity, his rebounding, and underrated all rounded game. He was a great player, but over a guy like Dirk, a former league MVP?

Your argument can work both ways, if you add Dirk to a team with a bunch of role players, and solid second options, you'd sure as hell perform better than a team with Oakley as one of the main options. And don't bring up the bull crap about Oakley fitting in with more talented teams, while it may be true, it's much easier to find the defense/role players than it is to find a legit first option that's capable of leading his team. Hell even on those Knicks teams which he thrived in, Dirk would have taken that team to another level. The Knicks would have still had that strong defensive core, and Dirk would have given Ewing that much needed offensive relief (Starks was their second leading scorer on their run to the finals, averaging 13 points per game on 38%). That duo could have been LETHAL and definitely more dangerous and potent than Ewing/Oakley.

Oakley isn't even the best defensive/two way player left, Buck Williams comes to mind...

[TheSheriff]

i still cant believe tmac, dirk and some others are on here.. nash is understandable, but tmac and dirk? holy f**ck some of you are clueless

You really need to examine what t-mac has done in his career. Here he is compared to Kobe:

http://www.wagesofwins.com/McGradyKobe.html

[bringinhinkie]

i still cant believe tmac, dirk and some others are on here.. nash is understandable, but tmac and dirk? holy f**ck some of you are clueless

You really need to examine what t-mac has done in his career. Here he is compared to Kobe:

http://www.wagesofwins.com/McGradyKobe.html

yea because stats define a player.. not like kobe has 3 rings, all nba defense, like 5 finals appearances, among others.. he already proved he can score 35 a game, yet it doesn't win so he is buying into more of a team concept (he took 500 less shots in 2 more games last year when he made the finals than his 35ppg year)

really you came into this thread comparing kobe and tmac purely based on stats? please tmac put up huge numbers on bad teams, now hes on a legit team and not only can he not stay healthy, his numbers have looked more like jamal crawfords than kobe bryants, dude has shot like 40% asa rocket and 43% for his career, kobe consistiently shoots 45-47% if you wanna talk stats

comparing tmac and kobe is like comparing derek jeter and nomar garciapara.. not even close

im not knocking tmac hes ridiculously talented, but he is not a top 52(i think you have him at 52) player, maybe top 75 and thats a compliment

[Baller 24]

yea because stats define a player.. not like kobe has 3 rings, all nba defense, like 5 finals appearances, among others.. he already proved he can score 35 a game, yet it doesn't win so he is buying into more of a team concept (he took 500 less shots in 2 more games last year when he made the finals than his 35ppg year)

really you came into this thread comparing kobe and tmac purely based on stats? please tmac put up huge numbers on bad teams, now hes on a legit team and not only can he not stay healthy, his numbers have looked more like jamal crawfords than kobe bryants, dude has shot like 40% asa rocket and 43% for his career, kobe consistiently shoots 45-47% if you wanna talk stats

comparing tmac and kobe is like comparing derek jeter and nomar garciapara.. not even close

im not knocking tmac hes ridiculously talented, but he is not a top 52(i think you have him at 52) player, maybe top 75 and thats a compliment

Kobe also played with the most dominant force in the NBA while relatively having a BETTER supporting cast at prime/peak form for either player, and it could be argued that T-Mac's best season statistically was better than Kobe's. And its not like McGrady's resume' is complete trash, btw McGrady was 55 here are his accolades:

*7-time All-NBA Team (2 first, 3 second, 2 third)
*7-time All-Star
*4 -Time top 10 MVP vote getter
*2-Time Top5 MVP vote getter
*2-Time Scoring Champion

[TheSheriff]

i still cant believe tmac, dirk and some others are on here.. nash is understandable, but tmac and dirk? holy f**ck some of you are clueless

You really need to examine what t-mac has done in his career. Here he is compared to Kobe:

http://www.wagesofwins.com/McGradyKobe.html

yea because stats define a player.. not like kobe has 3 rings, all nba defense, like 5 finals appearances, among others.. he already proved he can score 35 a game, yet it doesn't win so he is buying into more of a team concept (he took 500 less shots in 2 more games last year when he made the finals than his 35ppg year)

really you came into this thread comparing kobe and tmac purely based on stats? please tmac put up huge numbers on bad teams, now hes on a legit team and not only can he not stay healthy, his numbers have looked more like jamal crawfords than kobe bryants, dude has shot like 40% asa rocket and 43% for his career, kobe consistiently shoots 45-47% if you wanna talk stats

comparing tmac and kobe is like comparing derek jeter and nomar garciapara.. not even close

im not knocking tmac hes ridiculously talented, but he is not a top 52(i think you have him at 52) player, maybe top 75 and thats a compliment

I never said T-Mac deserved to be higher than kobe. You just seemed to be confused and think that one player makes a team, when that is clearly not the case.

Kobe made the Finals last year because he had a better supporting cast than he did in the previous years. Kobe won rings in the early 2000s because he played with Shaq.

Why did Jordan not win rings in the 1980s? Because his teammates weren't good enough. Why did KG, Pierce, and Ray Allen never win a ring before last year? Because their teammates weren't good enough. Baskettball is a team game.

Besides, you are only looking at offensive stats, which Kobe is clearly better at than T-Mac, but if you look at other stats, T-Mac has a better all around game.

Again, i am not saying T-Mac does not deserve to by as high as Kobe on this list, but there is a legit argument for him to be at least in the 50s.

Charles Oakley does not belong in the top 100 just because he lucked into having talented teammates. Just like Jim Loscutoff does not belong in the top 100 just because he played with Bill Russell, Bob Cousy, Sam Jones, Bill Sharman, ect...

[bringinhinkie]

tmac is playing with yao ming and hasnt sniffed the finals.. and no tmac does not have a better all around game, you are nuts its not even close.. kobe made the finals with 2 totally different teams, you guys act like he rode shaq to all those rings, as if he had no part in it, well he just got there without shaq, horry, fox and crew and its not like gasol is a superstar, he is nice but he aint 1/10 of what shaq is.. tmac has had several years with a top 15 or so player in the nba and hasn't won jack.. kobe in half a season with gasol made the finals and lost to a digusting celtic team..

you want to talk about "lucking" into good teamates? this is a garbage statement.. these guys play 10-20 years.. luck only goes so far, if you are that good, a gm at some point will build a team around you.. tmac has played for 3 teams now and won nothing.. you guys rip players like marbury for not winning sh*t, but what is the difference between him and tmac on the court? both put up great numbers, neither won anything, yet tmac gets a pass? why because he is a more likable guy?

how about instead of "lucking into teamates", you make your teammates better? trevor ariza, jordan farmar, sasha vujacic, luke walton, ronny turiaf (i know hes gone), and others are far from studs.. it wasnt long ago sasha n farmar were thought of as bums(dont deny this, there were threads everywhere), ariza was a losing KNICK, ronny turiaf got a longterm deal because of laker team success, yet now he is on a sh*t team putting up 4ppg - not his fault, but he doesn't have a star like kobe next to him anymore taking pressure off of him and the rest of the team

you swap a healthy tmac and kobe, and this laker team wins maybe 45 games, i doubt even that many

and the charles oakley knock.. he made the playoffs 15 straight years on 3 different teams... ya he must have lucked out, had nothing to do with being a top rebounder, defender, and hustle player in the nba year in and year out.. hate on the current knicks all you want.. but charles oakley lucking into good teams? wow.......

tmac is good.. the fact that he is ahead of worthy, parish, pearl, debusschere and only like 8 slots from guys like walton and mchale is criminal.. mchale and walton are easily top 35.. you cannot have guys like payton, nash, and dirk in front of them.. i mean you guys wrote that this thread was based on accomplishments, but you have 0 mention of championships? its all individual awards which are far from telling.. a guy like bill walton did something shaq never did, won a ship as the man, yea he had some good teammates like lucas, but he didn't have a top 20 all time player next to him like kobe or dwade who was unreal that season/postseason.. yet you have shaq 8th a walton 47th.. ya shaq had a more illustrious career, wasnt plagued by injuries, but 8th to 47th?

my point is your thread is inconsistent.. you are basing some guys off stat totals and all star game appearances, and then some on rings, and then saying some guys lucked into teammates, then some were unlucky.. ok you wanna say kobe and oakley and others had good teams, well its not like bill russell didnt have cousy, sammy jones, kc jones, tommy heinshohn, bill sharman, hondo, etcetc ya i agree russell is top 5 all time, but keep it consistent.. dont hold it against some guys and not against others.. dont hold it against a guy like debusschere because he played on great knick teams, the fact is he is a 2 time nba champion and arguably the greatest defense forward of all time

[Baller 24]

tmac is playing with yao ming and hasnt sniffed the finals.. and no tmac does not have a better all around game, you are nuts its not even close.. kobe made the finals with 2 totally different teams, you guys act like he rode shaq to all those rings, as if he had no part in it, well he just got there without shaq, horry, fox and crew and its not like gasol is a superstar, he is nice but he aint 1/10 of what shaq is.. tmac has had several years with a top 15 or so player in the nba and hasn't won jack.. kobe in half a season with gasol made the finals and lost to a digusting celtic team..

LOL, the Lakers were predicted to win the finals by a majority of analyst of the media and speculators of the game. McGrady has played with Yao twice in the playoffs, one of where McGrady dominated and was the best player on the court compared to how well the entire team of the '05 Mavs played. McGrady is a better passer/play-maker and it really isn't close, his assist percentage is soaring high, and is probably the 2nd or 3rd best play-maker among players that don't play the PG position. He is a better passer than Kobe, and at peak form rebounds are argued to be even better.

you want to talk about "lucking" into good teamates? this is a garbage statement.. these guys play 10-20 years.. luck only goes so far, if you are that good, a gm at some point will build a team around you.. tmac has played for 3 teams now and won nothing.. you guys rip players like marbury for not winning sh*t, but what is the difference between him and tmac on the court? both put up great numbers, neither won anything, yet tmac gets a pass? why because he is a more likable guy?

LOL at comparing Marbury to McGrady; T-Mac at one point was one of the most dominant players in the league, a top 5 player, a superstar at one point, and still in the past seasons a viable MVP candidate. You really want to talk about teammates? Alright, we can go that route, McGrady was the leader on his team first when he arrived in Orlando his supporting cast: Bo Outlaw, Darrel Armstrong, Pat Garrity, Horace Grant, Andrew DeClercq, and Jacque Vaughn; and continued to make it to the playoffs until it all blew up in his face in '04. He had one of the best statistical seasons to date for a superstar, and played exceptionally well. McGrady has ALWAYS been a good playoff performer, his playoff PER ranks 6th all time, he is 4th all time in points per game, he is only of only a handful of players that averaged 20, 6, 6 during the playoffs, and has always been there in the playoffs when his team needs him, regardless of his supporting cast choking and not showing up.

how about instead of "lucking into teamates", you make your teammates better? trevor ariza, jordan farmar, sasha vujacic, luke walton, ronny turiaf (i know hes gone), and others are far from studs.. it wasnt long ago sasha n farmar were thought of as bums(dont deny this, there were threads everywhere), ariza was a losing KNICK, ronny turiaf got a longterm deal because of laker team success, yet now he is on a sh*t team putting up 4ppg - not his fault, but he doesn't have a star like kobe next to him anymore taking pressure off of him and the rest of the team

Ugh are you kidding me? Yao does down with an injury in 2007 for 32 games, McGrady leads his team to a 20-10 record making his supporting cast AT THE TIME: Deke, Juwon Howard, Rafer Alston, Luther Head, and Chuck Hayes look like a superior cast. In '08 Yao goes down, and he continues to finish the 22 game winning streak, MAKING HIS TEAMMATES BETTER AROUND HIM, despite being injured himself on two different body parts.

you swap a healthy tmac and kobe, and this laker team wins maybe 45 games, i doubt even that many

Yet McGrady leads his team with Luis Scola, Rafer Alston, Deke, and Battier to 55 wins in '08 without Yao, and 52 games in '07 without Yao and there was no Scola at the time. The Rockets have a 30% winning percentage without McGrady, and his team impact is highly significant on the Rockets, they can't do much without him, and that's because he MAKES HIS TEAMMATES BETTER. They would win more than 50 games, I'm not saying they get the same results, but they win 50 games and make the playoffs, I'm not doubting that at all.

and the charles oakley knock.. he made the playoffs 15 straight years on 3 different teams... ya he must have lucked out, had nothing to do with being a top rebounder, defender, and hustle player in the nba year in and year out.. hate on the current knicks all you want.. but charles oakley lucking into good teams? wow.......

Yeah as a third string player....Oakley wasn't "lucked" onto playing good teams, you can't go anywhere with Oakley as the number 1 man, easily.

tmac is good.. the fact that he is ahead of worthy, parish, pearl, debusschere and only like 8 slots from guys like walton and mchale is criminal.. mchale and walton are easily top 35.. you cannot have guys like payton, nash, and dirk in front of them.. i mean you guys wrote that this thread was based on accomplishments, but you have 0 mention of championships? its all individual awards which are far from telling.. a guy like bill walton did something shaq never did, won a ship as the man, yea he had some good teammates like lucas, but he didn't have a top 20 all time player next to him like kobe or dwade who was unreal that season/postseason.. yet you have shaq 8th a walton 47th.. ya shaq had a more illustrious career, wasnt plagued by injuries, but 8th to 47th?

1) This is the 5th time I'm saying this, its a CAREER LIST, are you not getting that through your thick head?

2) McGrady and D.Wade were number 1 options and better than Worthy, Parish, Pearl, Debusscere AT PEAK FORM, and have proven it as number 1 options.

3) Regarding to Shaq and Walton; I'm going to say for the 6th time, this is a CAREER LIST, meaning you take longevity, career achievements, and awards into account, its the criteria. I've stated this 6 times not, not sure if you can't read or what's going on.

4) LMFAOROFLMFAOROFLMAORROFLLOLOLOLOLOL Shaq didn't win a ring AS THE MAN ? Who was the man then, Kobe? No.

my point is your thread is inconsistent.. you are basing some guys off stat totals and all star game appearances, and then some on rings, and then saying some guys lucked into teammates, then some were unlucky.. ok you wanna say kobe and oakley and others had good teams, well its not like bill russell didnt have cousy, sammy jones, kc jones, tommy heinshohn, bill sharman, hondo, etcetc ya i agree russell is top 5 all time, but keep it consistent.. dont hold it against some guys and not against others.. dont hold it against a guy like debusschere because he played on great knick teams, the fact is he is a 2 time nba champion and arguably the greatest defense forward of all time

So you want to make this list HYPOTHETICAL based on no evidence? Its a career list dude, if you want to make a hypothetical list, go right on; no need for you to poke your thick headed brain into this if you can't comprehend the basic criteria then stop arguing, because all of your arguements have been useless, hypothetical, and you have no idea when you're talking about when you say Shaq wasn't the man---those kinds of things makes me question if you've only seen basketball from the 60s and 70s LOL.

[TMACFORMVP]

and the charles oakley knock.. he made the playoffs 15 straight years on 3 different teams... ya he must have lucked out, had nothing to do with being a top rebounder, defender, and hustle player in the nba year in and year out.. hate on the current knicks all you want.. but charles oakley lucking into good teams? wow.......

Dude, I seriously wonder whether you can read, nobody is tarnishing the impact Oakley had on those teams, he was an amazing rebounder, a terrific defender and one of the best/better role players of all time. But he wasn't the sole reason they were a great team, much like when he left the Bulls, it's not like they fell into mediocrity after he left, in fact they started piling up championships. The Knicks even went back to the finals after Oakley left, his impact was there, but not as much a league MVP/perennial All-Star in a guy like Dirk.

Answer me this, if Oakley was replaced with Dirk, do the Knicks become worse? I wouldn't think so, they'd still have a strong defensive core, in Ewing/Mason/Starks/Harper and others, but they'd be so much more vastly superior offensively, the Knicks would have likely won the championship, multiple times. Look at their run to the Finals, John Starks was the 2nd leading scorer throughout the playoffs for that Knicks team, his stats? Under 14 points per game on 38%, that's pathetic, Ewing had NO offensive help.

Take the homer glasses off and realize what your spouting doesn't make any sense. Oakley isn't even the best defender/role player left, guys like Buck Williams keeps popping to mind, who was just as good a defender, if not better, but a better offensive player by a large margin.

its all individual awards which are far from telling.. a guy like bill walton did something shaq never did, won a ship as the man, yea he had some good teammates like lucas, but he didn't have a top 20 all time player next to him like kobe or dwade who was unreal that season/postseason.. yet you have shaq 8th a walton 47th.. ya shaq had a more illustrious career, wasnt plagued by injuries, but 8th to 47th?

Shaq wasn't a first option? That's ridiculous, if a guy is the defensive anchor, averaging nearly 30 points per game on unreal efficiency, tremendous passing from the low post, and one of the elite rebounders in the league wasn't a first option, then there has never been a legit first option to have ever played the game (aside from Oakley...). Shaq was not only more dominant than Walton, but did it 12x longer, and won 3 more championships. Walton was great in his one year peak, but that's the key word, ONE YEAR. He was unfortunately injured the rest of his career, and never came close to the dominance he displayed that season, Shaq showed that dominance and more for more than a decade. The difference in where both are ranked are clearly justified.

I don't think there's any real point towards arguing, you're to biased towards the Knicks, and too hard headed to realize you lack knowledge of the game, basing your rankings on All-Star players on championship teams (McHale) to superstar players that couldn't win the whole thing, but clearly accomplished more throughout their career, and led their respective teams to the finals as the MAIN MAN (Payton).

[bringinhinkie]

I didnt say shaq wasnt the first option you clowns, i said he wasnt the lone star(THE MAN) on his team like walton was.. im done arguing with you idiots, you twist my words so much its pathetic.. and mcgrady is not a better passer and playmaker than kobe, you are INSANE, quit going on APG and watch a game for a change.. and my bias towards the knicks? based on? kevin mchale and bill walton? pearl and debusschere just happened to be knicks at some point in their career - learn to read.. and no payton wasn't the main man on the sonics, his name was shawn kemp, even george karl himself admitted on national tv kemp was the superior player..

clearly im arguing with teenagers who only followed the nba since sayyy 1998? oh and you called oakley a third string player? third string? soo there were 10 players better than him on those knick teams? lol at calling me a homer because i brought up oakleys name, even though i never said ANYTHING about him being on the list, he wouldnt even make the top 100 all time team, no f**king ****.. but if i had a choice of him or tmac, id take him for reasons i stated.. tmac is a career loser, like STEPHON MARBURY, i never said they were similar talents, learn to read before you present your asinine arguments

and you said earl the pearl was not a number one option? LOL, go read up on his play prior to the knicks, you might learn something

keep overrating guys who were rated 98s in nba live like tmac and sh*tting on true champions like mchale, walton, debusschere, pearl.. im done with you losers, read up on the history of the game

oh and, you are clearly lost if you think the 90s knicks would have rather had dirk than oak.. the whole team was based on defense.. ask michael jordan what he thinks on this subject - and your statement the knicks would have won rings with dirk instead of oak is arguable the dumbest thing i have ever read on here, ever.. jordan himself said the 90s knicks > the 90s pistons (who won 2 rings).. the only thing that stopped them was MJ himself, not lack of offense you fool

[TMACFORMVP]

I didnt say shaq wasnt the first option you clowns, i said he wasnt the lone star(THE MAN) on his team like walton was..

You wrote this, "a guy like bill walton did something shaq never did, won a ship as the man."

In my mind, that implied, that Shaq didn't win it being the first option, or the best player on those championship teams. My bad for mis-understanding, but you could have worded it better as well.

oh and, you are clearly lost if you think the 90s knicks would have rather had dirk than oak.. the whole team was based on defense.. ask michael jordan what he thinks on this subject - and your statement the knicks would have won rings with dirk instead of oak is arguable the dumbest thing i have ever read on here, ever.. jordan himself said the 90s knicks > the 90s pistons (who won 2 rings).. the only thing that stopped them was MJ himself, not lack of offense you fool

Oakley wasn't the one that anchored the defense though, it was Ewing. Oakley was a large factor, correct, but they'd have still been an elite defensive team without him, they had Ewing. Mason, Starks, and Harper, all of whom were still All-NBA caliber defenders. The reason they lost wasn't offense, but with a Dirk type player in that series against Houston, instead of having to rely on Starks being that 2nd option and having to be the primary creator, Dirk would have made a world of a difference and taken a huge load off of Ewing. And again, I'm not denying Oakley's ability, he was great, but you're severely overrating his overall impact on the game, comparing him to a freaking MVP of the league.

and mcgrady is not a better passer and playmaker than kobe, you are INSANE, quit going on APG and watch a game for a change..

I refrained from even talking about McGrady, because frankly he's nowhere near the class Kobe is in, and will never be, but it's asinine that you'd think it's insane to even compare the two in terms of play-making, because these past couple of years McGrady's passing and play-making has been the biggest impact to the Rockets, even moreso than his scoring ability. It's even been noted that McGrady's play-making gets underrated due to his assist numbers, JVG has gone on record to say that he's the third best passer in the ENTIRE league. Obviously stretching the situation, but an idea of the passer McGrady was to the Rockets these past couple of seasons.

and no payton wasn't the main man on the sonics, his name was shawn kemp, even george karl himself admitted on national tv kemp was the superior player..

You may need to take some of your own advice and watch the games. A guy like Reed won MVP/Finals MVP of those Knicks, but it's becoming more and more a consensus these days that Frazier was the more impactful player, and provided more stability to those Knicks teams. Payton was their main anchor defensively for the Sonics, he was their best scorer from the perimeter, and guarded Jordan in the finals better than anyone else has, he's one of the greatest defensive PG's to have ever played the game, a 20+ PPG scorer, and an excellent all around player. He was like a Billups on steroids, with better rebounding, post game, defense and less shooting. It's the same reason, Payton also made the All-NBA 2nd team, and All-NBA 1st team defense, finishing higher in MVP voting when the Sonics made the finals. But the argument for who was the best player is definitely there, so I can respect that.

The rest of your post was directed at Baller, so won't argue those points. We'll agree to disagree I guess, no point in continuing the argument, since you've already resorted to name calling like "clowns," "fools," "losers." There's no point in arguing when someone can't argue objectively with complete disregard for the other side.

And P.S. McGrady was ranked below both McHale and Walton, the way an outsider would view your posts, they'd think McGrady was voted higher than them. And for the record, I never voted for McGrady in the spot he was voted in at.

[Baller 24]

I didnt say shaq wasnt the first option you clowns, i said he wasnt the lone star(THE MAN) on his team like walton was.. im done arguing with you idiots, you twist my words so much its pathetic.. and mcgrady is not a better passer and playmaker than kobe, you are INSANE, quit going on APG and watch a game for a change.. and my bias towards the knicks? based on? kevin mchale and bill walton? pearl and debusschere just happened to be knicks at some point in their career - learn to read.. and no payton wasn't the main man on the sonics, his name was shawn kemp, even george karl himself admitted on national tv kemp was the superior player..

You can give up, but everyone knows you've lost from the very beginning, since there pretty much wasn't any arguments.

McGrady is easily the better play-maker than Kobe; quit going by assist per game? I never was though, I'm using assist percentage---that number is responsible for the number of plays created when the player is on the court. Ask Laker fans, Kobe Bryant fans, I'll make a thread about it if you want too, Tracy McGrady since arriving in Houston has easily been the better play-maker, hes turned into one of the most unselfish players in the league, LOL...but OK we shouldn't look at statistical evidence from an objective point of view that shows why McGrady is a better play-maker/passer than Kobe by a decent margin...watching a game won't change any of that, numbers are numbers and they prove a lot of what watching a game does.

Also Put Paul Pierce, Vince Carter, and Tracy McGrady next to Shaq and you get the same results, nothing new.

clearly im arguing with teenagers who only followed the nba since sayyy 1998? oh and you called oakley a third string player? third string? soo there were 10 players better than him on those knick teams? lol at calling me a homer because i brought up oakleys name, even though i never said ANYTHING about him being on the list, he wouldnt even make the top 100 all time team, no f**king ****.. but if i had a choice of him or tmac, id take him for reasons i stated.. tmac is a career loser, like STEPHON MARBURY, i never said they were similar talents, learn to read before you present your asinine arguments

No you learn how to read, because from an objective mind no one would say Stephon Marbury and Tracy McGrady are in the same boat, Marbury is a career loser with one of the worst reps in the entire league, Tracy McGrady isn't known as a "cancer", he doesn't fight for "playoff spots", or these days "lottery picks". And the Resume tells its all.

LOL, again you'd take Oakley over Wade, McGrady, AND Dirk? I understand, now let me ask you this---put MVP Dirk next to Ewing instead of Oakley, and do the Knicks win the tittle in '94? I'd assume so, how about if you put peak McGrady/Wade next to Ewing, who do the '94 Rockets have that can stop a legitimate scoring threat from basically any point on the floor? Yeah, and BTW I'm a Rockets fan to the max

I've followed the NBA since the early 90s I guess, but I've learned and watched a lot of games---I've seen it all from Bob Petite to Derrick Rose to make an objective standpoint about the game, unlike you. McGrady is a career loser? Explain why again? He is only 29 years old and has accomplished all of the following:
---He is a terrific play-off performer
---He is a 2 time scoring champion
---7-time All-NBA team (2 first, 3 second, and 2 third)
---The Most Improved Player of the Year
---4 time top 10 in MVP voting
---2 time top 5 in MVP voting
---Statistically had one of the best all around seasons in NBA history

Therefore, Tracy McGrady >>>>>>>> Stephon Marbury, who fights for playoff spots WITH TALENTED TEAMS (Marion and Amare are more talented than anything McGrady had throughout his prime).

and you said earl the pearl was not a number one option? LOL, go read up on his play prior to the knicks, you might learn something

No....Earl Monroe was not a number one option on the Knicks. Walt Frazier was easily the leader of that team, and was most responsible for that teams success even during Reed's years playing the game. And after Walt was traded; Earl didn't even lead the team to the playoffs until NUMBER ONE option Bob McAdoo arrived. Man, and you're calling us idiots that know nothing about history, when you don't know much about your favorite player.

keep overrating guys who were rated 98s in nba live like tmac and sh*tting on true champions like mchale, walton, debusschere, pearl.. im done with you losers, read up on the history of the game

Lets see...1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7....yup this is the 7th time I've said this now. This list is a CAREER LIST, it goes around a basis of an overall players career, awards, longevity, and team impact.

oh and, you are clearly lost if you think the 90s knicks would have rather had dirk than oak.. the whole team was based on defense.. ask michael jordan what he thinks on this subject - and your statement the knicks would have won rings with dirk instead of oak is arguable the dumbest thing i have ever read on here, ever.. jordan himself said the 90s knicks > the 90s pistons (who won 2 rings).. the only thing that stopped them was MJ himself, not lack of offense you fool

There is no denying that the 90s Knicks are one of the best defensive teams in NBA history; but Patrick Ewing is more responsible for that than anyone on the team, he was the DEFENSIVE ANCHOR on that team, and ugh its not like Dirk/Tmac/Wade bring more to the table compared to Charles Oakley. Come on man, you're talking about Oakley OVER three talented and dominant players.

[bringinhinkie]

-Also Put Paul Pierce, Vince Carter, and Tracy McGrady next to Shaq and you get the same results, nothing new.

are you insane with this comment? VC now? ...

No you learn how to read, because from an objective mind no one would say Stephon Marbury and Tracy McGrady are in the same boat, Marbury is a career loser with one of the worst reps in the entire league, Tracy McGrady isn't known as a "cancer", he doesn't fight for "playoff spots", or these days "lottery picks". And the Resume tells its all.

again, on the court, both have achieved NOTHING, how can i say it clearer?

LOL, again you'd take Oakley over Wade, McGrady, AND Dirk? I understand, now let me ask you this---put MVP Dirk next to Ewing instead of Oakley, and do the Knicks win the tittle in '94? I'd assume so, how about if you put peak McGrady/Wade next to Ewing, who do the '94 Rockets have that can stop a legitimate scoring threat from basically any point on the floor? Yeah, and BTW I'm a Rockets fan to the max

Wade now? why are you putting words in my mouth? I never ever said this, learn to read, again for real quit trying to make me look dumb by making sh*t up.

I've followed the NBA since the early 90s I guess, but I've learned and watched a lot of games---I've seen it all from Bob Petite to Derrick Rose to make an objective standpoint about the game, unlike you. McGrady is a career loser? Explain why again? He is only 29 years old and has accomplished all of the following:
---He is a terrific play-off performer
---He is a 2 time scoring champion
---7-time All-NBA team (2 first, 3 second, and 2 third)
---The Most Improved Player of the Year
---4 time top 10 in MVP voting
---2 time top 5 in MVP voting
---Statistically had one of the best all around seasons in NBA history

Cool he has great individual achievments, very impressive.. yes he has great playoff NUMBERS, but how many times has he made the second round?? Anyone???


No....Earl Monroe was not a number one option on the Knicks. Walt Frazier was easily the leader of that team, and was most responsible for that teams success even during Reed's years playing the game. And after Walt was traded; Earl didn't even lead the team to the playoffs until NUMBER ONE option Bob McAdoo arrived. Man, and you're calling us idiots that know nothing about history, when you don't know much about your favorite player.

wow this is your best one.. i wrote "and you said earl the pearl was not a number one option? LOL, go read up on his play prior to the knicks, you might learn something"..

Helloooo? read much? Earl Monroe was on the BALTIMORE BULLETS before the knicks and was their superstar.. i don't know much? yet you didn't even know this? LOL wooooow.. credibility lost..

Lets see...1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7....yup this is the 7th time I've said this now. This list is a CAREER LIST, it goes around a basis of an overall players career, awards, longevity, and team impact.

i know you did, and i am saying mchale, debusschere, earl the pearl, and walton(even in his injury plagued career) had more of an impact than dirk or tmac.. this shouldn't be debatable, its a known fact

There is no denying that the 90s Knicks are one of the best defensive teams in NBA history; but Patrick Ewing is more responsible for that than anyone on the team, he was the DEFENSIVE ANCHOR on that team, and ugh its not like Dirk/Tmac/Wade bring more to the table compared to Charles Oakley. Come on man, you're talking about Oakley OVER three talented and dominant players.

again with the wade? where did i said i'd take oakman over wade? wade proved to me hes a winner, i only mentioned him once in reference to shaq winning a title with a top player.. you are severely underrating what oakley meant to the 90s knicks.. go on the knicks forum or ask a knick fan at least in their 20's how important he was.. There is no way you can convince me that Dirk or Tmac would have fit better on the 90s knicks than oakley, idc if they finish with 20-25,000 points, there is no way.

[ronnymac2]

^^^^Actually, Wes Unseld was their superstar. Wes won MVP and rookie of the year in 1969. Monroe was their best scorer though.

[Baller 24]

are you insane with this comment? VC now? ...

Next to Shaq, he'd look like a superstar, I mean he is a 25ppg/5ast/5reb/45%/37% player with extreme athleticism and a terrific mid range jump shot.

again, on the court, both have achieved NOTHING, how can i say it clearer?

But there's a difference, Marbury is a cancer to his team and makes his team worse with his statistics, while McGrady---not so much.

Wade now? why are you putting words in my mouth? I never ever said this, learn to read, again for real quit trying to make me look dumb by making sh*t up.

You were earlier talking about Wade, so I thought you'd also meant him.

Cool he has great individual achievments, very impressive.. yes he has great playoff NUMBERS, but how many times has he made the second round?? Anyone???

Again, does the blame go on him if key members of his supporting cast shoots 33%, 22%, and 25% in final game 7?

wow this is your best one.. i wrote "and you said earl the pearl was not a number one option? LOL, go read up on his play prior to the knicks, you might learn something"..

Helloooo? read much? Earl Monroe was on the BALTIMORE BULLETS before the knicks and was their superstar.. i don't know much? yet you didn't even know this? LOL wooooow.. credibility lost..

Whoops, thought you said Knicks---my fault, but obviously he still doesn't have the accolades to measure up to some of the players that are already on the list.

i know you did, and i am saying mchale, debusschere, earl the pearl, and walton(even in his injury plagued career) had more of an impact than dirk or tmac.. this shouldn't be debatable, its a known fact

Team Impact can be argued sure, but what about achievements as a number 1 option, longevity, awards and accolades? McGrady isn't even in the top 50 so I think its highly irreverent to bring him up against these guys, but Dirk? Come on now, from 2000 to 2007 the Dallas Mavericks have been one of the most solid basketball clubs around the league, they've gotten far, and Dirk has achieved a lot and accomplished enough for his accolades to measure up to these guys.

Dirk v Walton on an all-time list based on career: Dirk has the accolades, awards, and obviously not being injury prone helps. If this were based on peak play; Walton would be MUCH higher---no doubt.
Dirk v McHale on an all-time list based on career: Dirk is a better offensive player, McHale has the better defense, but McHale also had the help of Larry Bird, while Dirk has an MVP as the main man, while having accolades to actually pass him up.
Dirk v Monroe --- well I think the MVP, accolades, awards, achievements put him easily ahead of Monroe.
Dirk v Debusschere----Come on you're comparing an MVP to a player that wasn't even a number one option when he was winning.

again with the wade? where did i said i'd take oakman over wade? wade proved to me hes a winner, i only mentioned him once in reference to shaq winning a title with a top player.. you are severely underrating what oakley meant to the 90s knicks.. go on the knicks forum or ask a knick fan at least in their 20's how important he was.. There is no way you can convince me that Dirk or Tmac would have fit better on the 90s knicks than oakley, idc if they finish with 20-25,000 points, there is no way.

Alright, lets take T-Mac and Wade out of this. Replace Dirk with Oakley since they play the same position. Dirk next to a defensive anchor like Ewing plays MUCH better, you're only losing a few rebounds, losing some edge on the defensive part of Dirk, but you gain about 10 times as much offensively, while overcoming the small defensive collapse. You do understand that you're putting a 25PTS/10REB/3AST/50%FG/40%3PT/90%FT next to Ewing along with those solid defensive Knicks, the Knicks easily become a MUCH better team overall.

[Veggamattic]

Even though I'm pretty old school I'd like to see some more love on this list for the younger players. There are current NBA players that could dominate many of the existing list.

[TheSheriff]

Even though I'm pretty old school I'd like to see some more love on this list for the younger players. There are current NBA players that could dominate many of the existing list.

Paul Pierce is currently nominated.

[Muzzleshot]

Artis Gilmore the 31st best player in NBA history? He shouldn't even be on the list or maybe near the end of it.

Dave Bing has yet to appear on the list but players like Moncrief, Dumars, and Dennis Johnson are in front of him?

Earl Monroe anyone?

I could go on and on.

[penbeast0]

Muzzleshot, without calling you a clueless newbie, did you ever see Gilmore play? He was Shaq level with better defense BUT (and it's a big but) a passive attitude. If he had had Jordan's personality and drive, he would have been as good as Kareem.

Same with Moncrief, Dumars, and DJ . . . you prefer Bing or Monroe . . . does defense matter to you? Those happen to be arguably 3 of the 5 greatest defensive two guards in NBA history and none of them were slouches at the offensive end.

[TMACFORMVP]

Artis Gilmore the 31st best player in NBA history? He shouldn't even be on the list or maybe near the end of it.

Dave Bing has yet to appear on the list but players like Moncrief, Dumars, and Dennis Johnson are in front of him?

Earl Monroe anyone?

I could go on and on.

Defense must mean nothing, freaking Moncrief is arguably the greatest perimeter defender of all time, add that with his 20/4/6 game on 50%, he was a vastly better player than Bing. Same situation with Dumars and DJ who are two of the all-time great defenders from the guard position, but also 20 point per game scorers with good all rounded games.

And seriously Gilmore has to be least talked about superstar player ever. He was a great defender, an awesome rebounder and one of the most efficient scorers of all time. This is a guy that led his team to the championship in the ABA during a time frame where only Dr. J was winning. Gilmore was just as good as Ewing.

Edit- missed penbeast's post haha

[ag101]

Wow... I find it quite unbelievable how underrated Oscar Robertson is.. The man is top 5-7 in nearly every basketball circle.
IMO, Magic >> Kareem, and Kobe >> Jerry West.
Charles Barkley is also quite underrated. He's better than KG and should not be that much lower ranked than Malone.
Lebron James already cracking the top 50 is pretty laughable. (better than Jkidd, Nique and Worthy??)
Iverson barely in the top 50 is a damn shame.
Adrian Dantley is underrated IMO. Should be top 30.

Guess I'm just nitpicking.. Don't even know if it's the place to voice displeasures or not.