Your Unpopular Basketball Opinions? [PC Board Edition]

[SkyHookFTW]

There is no sport that is intrinsically more luck driven than another. The only difference is parity.

This is false. The NBA is in fact the least luck driven sport of the big 4 in North America and its not even particularly close. Form holds in the NBA way more than in any of the other sports.

That has little to do with luck, and more to do with the playoff format and the nature of the game itself. Switch to a NCAA-style format and see how much form still holds.

[Texas Chuck]

There is no sport that is intrinsically more luck driven than another. The only difference is parity.

This is false. The NBA is in fact the least luck driven sport of the big 4 in North America and its not even particularly close. Form holds in the NBA way more than in any of the other sports.

That has little to do with luck, and more to do with the playoff format and the nature of the game itself. Switch to a NCAA-style format and see how much form still holds.

I don't see how your post is a rebuttal to mine. A possible explanation? Sure. And baseball and especially hockey have the same format. And luck plays a far bigger role in those sports than it does the NBA.

[Dr Positivity]

Porzingis still has the floor of a mediocre journeyman

[lorak]

I wonder why I am the only person who remembers Chicago's rotations during those years. Jordan always went out with the other starters and Pippen stayed in and played with the 2nd unit and then sat when Jordan and the other starters returned. So judging Pippen's defense by on/off numbers is a flawed approach without understanding the context of the numbers.

In 14 quoted data points only 3 are from years with Jordan (98 w/o, drtg from 97 and 98). So your point is completely irrelevant here as on/off numbers with MJ are only 2/14 of presented data.

Besides you are wrong, because it wasn't always that way as Jordan also played with bench, when Pippen was off the court. For example: http://stats.nba.com/game/#!/0049600083/playbyplay/
1Q 4:11 - Pippen out, Kukoc in (and before Kerr subbed Harped), several seconds later Buchler in, Longley out and MJ plays last 4 minutes of 1Q with 3 bench players. Of course it was because of Pippen's foul trouble, but in G2 MJ started 2ndQ with bench and played around 5 minutes without Scottie... and so on and so on.

[Dr Spaceman]

I think Kareem is the most consistently overrated player on RealGM. I don't think he was ever on a tier where he was the undisputed best player in the league for a long stretch like a LeBron or Jordan. I think Lareem's peak season would make him like the 6th or 7th best player in the league today. Certainly a superstar, but I don't have him on the all time tier.

I actually don't really see a feasible way to rank Kareem ahead of Garnett or Duncan. They have comparable longevity and they both peaked higher IMO.

I also think Walton was the best player in the league in both 77 and 78.

[studcrackers]

Why so low on Kareem?

[BasketballFan7]

I think Lareem's peak season would make him like the 6th or 7th best player in the league today. Certainly a superstar, but I don't have him on the all time tier.

Nice hybrid.

[Quotatious]

I think Lareem's peak season would make him like the 6th or 7th best player in the league today. Certainly a superstar, but I don't have him on the all time tier.

Nice hybrid.

Lareem Abdul-Bird? Man, what a monster that would be.

Seriously though, I have no idea why Spaceman is so low on KAJ, I would love to see his reasoning. I think peak Kareem would definitely be the best player today, honestly. Who's going to guard him? Roy freaking Hibbert averaged 22/10 on 61% TS in a playoff series 4 years ago, against a team that went on to win the NBA championship that year. Good luck trying to deal with prime Kareem as a small-ball lineup.

I really don't believe there's no place for a dominant low post scorer in today's game. I just think players like that are very rare. Kareem was perhaps the best ever at that, so he would dominate in any era. Imagine Kareem with all that spacing around him, and with his passing ability and very underrated mobility/athleticism, he would be pretty much unstoppable.

[70sFan]

I think Kareem is the most consistently overrated player on RealGM. I don't think he was ever on a tier where he was the undisputed best player in the league for a long stretch like a LeBron or Jordan. I think Lareem's peak season would make him like the 6th or 7th best player in the league today. Certainly a superstar, but I don't have him on the all time tier.

I actually don't really see a feasible way to rank Kareem ahead of Garnett or Duncan. They have comparable longevity and they both peaked higher IMO.

I also think Walton was the best player in the league in both 77 and 78.

I'm on the opposite side - Kareem is my GOAT and I have him as clearly the best player in 7 seasons (1971-74, 1976, 1977 and 1980). I believe he's better basketball player than Shaq and his prime is stronger than any bigman (even Wilt/Shaq/Hakeem trio) not named Bill Russell. He didn't have any big weakness in his game, he's GOAT low post scorer and all-time great passer. His defense is underrated (in Bucks period he was DPOTY candidate in every season).

Which 5-6 players would you take over prime Kareem today? Personally, I would take him over anyone (even James) today, but maybe I'm biased...

[SideshowBob]

I think Kareem is the most consistently overrated player on RealGM. I don't think he was ever on a tier where he was the undisputed best player in the league for a long stretch like a LeBron or Jordan. I think Lareem's peak season would make him like the 6th or 7th best player in the league today. Certainly a superstar, but I don't have him on the all time tier.

I actually don't really see a feasible way to rank Kareem ahead of Garnett or Duncan. They have comparable longevity and they both peaked higher IMO.

I also think Walton was the best player in the league in both 77 and 78.

I'm on the opposite side - Kareem is my GOAT and I have him as clearly the best player in 7 seasons (1971-74, 1976, 1977 and 1980). I believe he's better basketball player than Shaq and his prime is stronger than any bigman (even Wilt/Shaq/Hakeem trio) not named Bill Russell. He didn't have any big weakness in his game, he's GOAT low post scorer and all-time great passer. His defense is underrated (in Bucks period he was DPOTY candidate in every season).

Which 5-6 players would you take over prime Kareem today? Personally, I would take him over anyone (even James) today, but maybe I'm biased...

Yes but your opinion is consistent!

I think that if you think Kareem had a GOAT-leve peak, he should pretty easily be number one on your GOAT career list, because if his peak is truly that good, he's got so many years close to or at his peak that no one else should even have an argument. Yet off memory, there are plenty of very reasonable/knowledgeable folks that have Kareem's peak as top 5ish, but then have him only 3rd or 4th on their all time list. Logically/mathematically speaking, this does not add up to me. I assume that they do not hold the opinion that Kareem's got multiple peak level years (as you pointed out) or perhaps there are factors beyond cumulative level of play being considered.

Personally, my opinion leans towards Spaceman's (though not quite as low). I agree with your general assessment of his defense during the Bucks period - my qualm is that I think his offensive/defensive peaks just didn't collide at all. Bucks level D plus Lakers level O at the same time is definitely a top tier peak, but that guy never existed.

[lorak]

I think peak Kareem would definitely be the best player today, honestly. Who's going to guard him? Roy freaking Hibbert averaged 22/10 on 61% TS in a playoff series 4 years ago, against a team that went on to win the NBA championship that year. Good luck trying to deal with prime Kareem as a small-ball lineup.

I really don't believe there's no place for a dominant low post scorer in today's game. I just think players like that are very rare. Kareem was perhaps the best ever at that, so he would dominate in any era. Imagine Kareem with all that spacing around him, and with his passing ability and very underrated mobility/athleticism, he would be pretty much unstoppable.

Low post oriented offenses aren't very good, even with such player like KAJ as 1st option. So even if no one would be able to stop him today (and IMO such statements are pointless, because it's not about 1vs1, but how team D works) it wouldn't be so devastating, because his low post touches would limit his team 3p and general ball movement. Even bigger issues would occur on defensive end. Jabbar wasn't elite even in his era and today his weaknesses would be more exposed, because NBA is dominated by p&r. How he would defend ball handler? How would he rotate to 3p line?

[Baski]

No disagreement on Pippen, but the "The Glove" comment makes me think. I'm sure you have other reasons why you are confident in Payton's defensive prowess but i just wanted to point out that nicknames aren't always accurate. Just look at Mr. Big Shot and Steve Franchise for example.

Horry did hit a number of big shots. Not sure why you think his nickname is ill-fitting.

And Steve Francis just got the nickname because of how it fits his name. Not because anyone really thought he was a franchise level player.

I don't think either of those make the valid point you want to make--that a nickname isn't a good defense for someone being a good defender.

Of course I side on both Payton and Pippen--in particular Pippen--being elite defensive players. Someone itt tried to make the case that Pippen was the 3rd best defensive player on the Bulls. I can at least listen to that with a younger Jordan and Horace Grant tho I personally think Pippen was the best defender of that trio, but you can certainly make arguments for each of the other guys. I don't really see a good argument for the Bulls version of Rodman or post-retirement Jordan being better defenders than Pippen who imo was quite clearly the head of the snake on a team that dominated based on its defense.

edit saw that he said Pippen wasn't even 3rd best. Now I guess he'd take Ron Harper? Yeah a good solid defender and being the same size as the other 3 made his utility higher than his ability because of how they could switch literally everything. But its hard for me to believe someone really thinks that----which makes his post perfect for this thread I guess.

Mr. Big Shot was actually referring to Chauncey Billups. Big Shot Rob is well deserved in my book.
Point noted on the Steve Franchise thing. I guess i just wanted to give examples and they turned out to be not so good ones.
I was just pointing out that a better case could be made for Payton than his nickname, like he did for Pippen in his post and later did after my post.

I LOVE CARROT CAKE!!!!!!

[SkyHookFTW]

This is false. The NBA is in fact the least luck driven sport of the big 4 in North America and its not even particularly close. Form holds in the NBA way more than in any of the other sports.

That has little to do with luck, and more to do with the playoff format and the nature of the game itself. Switch to a NCAA-style format and see how much form still holds.

I don't see how your post is a rebuttal to mine. A possible explanation? Sure. And baseball and especially hockey have the same format. And luck plays a far bigger role in those sports than it does the NBA.

It is more of an explanation than a rebuttal, though the format comment holds true. In the long run, in all sports with a multi-tier multi-game playoff system, the better team usually wins. As the old saying goes, "Good teams make their own luck." This is why the NFL sees more upsets than any of the major sports, the one game playoff system....yet even in the NFL, you can pick out certain teams that are almost always in contention. That is not luck, but the product of a good front office combined with great coaching. Of course, if you want to say the Patriots got lucky by finding Tom Brady in the 6th round, go ahead.

[Quotatious]

I think peak Kareem would definitely be the best player today, honestly. Who's going to guard him? Roy freaking Hibbert averaged 22/10 on 61% TS in a playoff series 4 years ago, against a team that went on to win the NBA championship that year. Good luck trying to deal with prime Kareem as a small-ball lineup.

I really don't believe there's no place for a dominant low post scorer in today's game. I just think players like that are very rare. Kareem was perhaps the best ever at that, so he would dominate in any era. Imagine Kareem with all that spacing around him, and with his passing ability and very underrated mobility/athleticism, he would be pretty much unstoppable.

Low post oriented offenses aren't very good, even with such player like KAJ as 1st option. So even if no one would be able to stop him today (and IMO such statements are pointless, because it's not about 1vs1, but how team D works) it wouldn't be so devastating, because his low post touches would limit his team 3p and general ball movement. Even bigger issues would occur on defensive end. Jabbar wasn't elite even in his era and today his weaknesses would be more exposed, because NBA is dominated by p&r. How he would defend ball handler? How would he rotate to 3p line?

Shaq, normally a below average pick & roll defender, survived pretty effectively in the modern era, just 10-15 years ago, and Kareem was more agile than Shaq. Even Yao Ming, who played on elite (top 5) defensive teams almost his entire career, wasn't a great pick & roll defender, and Yao was still in his prime as recently as 8 years ago. I think it's really a case where someone's strengths overshadow his weaknesses by a large margin. If we're talking about prime 70s Kareem, not the old man version that played with Magic, then there's no doubt that he was excellent athletically. He also has a ton of value as a rim protector, obviously. Just because of his size and shot-blocking instincts. Rim protectors are always valuable defensively.

[eminence]

.

.

.

+1 for consistency as well!

I've got KAJ ~9 on my peak list and he still comes out #1 overall whenever I start doing a GOAT list due to that crazy good prime consistency with excellent longevity.

[lorak]

I think peak Kareem would definitely be the best player today, honestly. Who's going to guard him? Roy freaking Hibbert averaged 22/10 on 61% TS in a playoff series 4 years ago, against a team that went on to win the NBA championship that year. Good luck trying to deal with prime Kareem as a small-ball lineup.

I really don't believe there's no place for a dominant low post scorer in today's game. I just think players like that are very rare. Kareem was perhaps the best ever at that, so he would dominate in any era. Imagine Kareem with all that spacing around him, and with his passing ability and very underrated mobility/athleticism, he would be pretty much unstoppable.

Low post oriented offenses aren't very good, even with such player like KAJ as 1st option. So even if no one would be able to stop him today (and IMO such statements are pointless, because it's not about 1vs1, but how team D works) it wouldn't be so devastating, because his low post touches would limit his team 3p and general ball movement. Even bigger issues would occur on defensive end. Jabbar wasn't elite even in his era and today his weaknesses would be more exposed, because NBA is dominated by p&r. How he would defend ball handler? How would he rotate to 3p line?

Shaq, normally a below average pick & roll defender, survived pretty effectively in the modern era, just 10-15 years ago, and Kareem was more agile than Shaq. Even Yao Ming, who played on elite (top 5) defensive teams almost his entire career, wasn't a great pick & roll defender, and Yao was still in his prime as recently as 8 years ago. I think it's really a case where someone's strengths overshadow his weaknesses by a large margin. If we're talking about prime 70s Kareem, not the old man version that played with Magic, then there's no doubt that he was excellent athletically. He also has a ton of value as a rim protector, obviously. Just because of his size and shot-blocking instincts. Rim protectors are always valuable defensively.

During Shaq's prime NBA wasn't so p&r oriented as it is today and LA was below 15 3PA, now it's over 20 and closer to 30 with each season. Besides Shaq was better in the paint defender than Kareem - and that's serious issue, as KAJ was criticized for his defense even in his era, when his skillset was more valuable. I think O'Neal was also better offensively, because he was able to take deeper position and make quicker move to the hoop.

BTW, anyone has numbers (with/without, on/off) how Shaq's team were doing on offense (r_ortg) without Penny, Kobe and Wade?

[70sFan]

I think peak Kareem would definitely be the best player today, honestly. Who's going to guard him? Roy freaking Hibbert averaged 22/10 on 61% TS in a playoff series 4 years ago, against a team that went on to win the NBA championship that year. Good luck trying to deal with prime Kareem as a small-ball lineup.

I really don't believe there's no place for a dominant low post scorer in today's game. I just think players like that are very rare. Kareem was perhaps the best ever at that, so he would dominate in any era. Imagine Kareem with all that spacing around him, and with his passing ability and very underrated mobility/athleticism, he would be pretty much unstoppable.

Low post oriented offenses aren't very good, even with such player like KAJ as 1st option. So even if no one would be able to stop him today (and IMO such statements are pointless, because it's not about 1vs1, but how team D works) it wouldn't be so devastating, because his low post touches would limit his team 3p and general ball movement. Even bigger issues would occur on defensive end. Jabbar wasn't elite even in his era and today his weaknesses would be more exposed, because NBA is dominated by p&r. How he would defend ball handler? How would he rotate to 3p line?

Help defense wouldn't do a **** without size. You need to have big, strong defender to at least push him out of the paint. People call Kareem a finesse player but forget that he was one of the most physicaly imposing players ever. He would be listed probably at 7'3 (second tallest player after Boban today) with ~250 lbs frame, very quick and athletic with strong legs. Semi-centers like Green, Frye or Favors would be destroyed. They would need a help which makes someone wide open. It's not as easy as many here think. A few years ago much less athletic and less versatile Yao Ming did just fine against modern defensive schemes.

Kareem is better P&R defender than either Yao or Shaq. I don't know why you said he wasn't elite defender in his time. During his Bucks years he was the real defensive anchor and great rim protector. Even in late 70s he was great when he wanted - he coasted a bit in RS, but he was still great in playoffs. Even as late as in early 80s he was one of the better defensive centers in the league.

[LA Bird]

I think that if you think Kareem had a GOAT-leve peak, he should pretty easily be number one on your GOAT career list, because if his peak is truly that good, he's got so many years close to or at his peak that no one else should even have an argument. Yet off memory, there are plenty of very reasonable/knowledgeable folks that have Kareem's peak as top 5ish, but then have him only 3rd or 4th on their all time list. Logically/mathematically speaking, this does not add up to me. I assume that they do not hold the opinion that Kareem's got multiple peak level years (as you pointed out) or perhaps there are factors beyond cumulative level of play being considered.

100% agree with this. I raised the same point a while ago about Kareem's peak but nobody replied at the time:

A question for the guys who rank peak Kareem substantially higher, where do you rank his career all time? Reason I ask this is because I rarely see anybody rank Kareem as the GOAT, which is practically impossible if you value his peak that highly and take into account his GOAT longevity.

[lorak]

Help defense wouldn't do a **** without size. You need to have big, strong defender to at least push him out of the paint. People call Kareem a finesse player but forget that he was one of the most physicaly imposing players ever. He would be listed probably at 7'3 (second tallest player after Boban today) with ~250 lbs frame, very quick and athletic with strong legs. Semi-centers like Green, Frye or Favors would be destroyed.

They wouldn't defend KAJ, but if you are focusing so much on size, then keep in mind that Frye and Favors are bigger than Thurmond was, who destroyed Jabbar in playoffs.

They would need a help which makes someone wide open. It's not as easy as many here think. A few years ago much less athletic and less versatile Yao Ming did just fine against modern defensive schemes.

Yao was elite (for a 7footer) shooter from FT (83%) and midrange (around 44-45%!) and that's why he was doing so good on offense. Kareem on the other hand was mediocre FT shooter (72%) and basically didn't have midrange game (yes, I know he occasionally made them, but it wasn't something he regularly used and was good at).

Kareem is better P&R defender than either Yao or Shaq. I don't know why you said he wasn't elite defender in his time.

Search for old posts of Bastillion's and mine - we discussed it in detail several years ago.

[70sFan]

Help defense wouldn't do a **** without size. You need to have big, strong defender to at least push him out of the paint. People call Kareem a finesse player but forget that he was one of the most physicaly imposing players ever. He would be listed probably at 7'3 (second tallest player after Boban today) with ~250 lbs frame, very quick and athletic with strong legs. Semi-centers like Green, Frye or Favors would be destroyed.

They wouldn't defend KAJ, but if you are focusing so much on size, then keep in mind that Frye and Favors are bigger than Thurmond was, who destroyed Jabbar in playoffs.

I don't want to focus on size alone because it's not the most important thing. I just want to say that smallballs would be ineffective against Kareem even with help defense.

BTW, neither Frye nor Favors are bigger than Thurmond. Derrick is just under 6'9 barefeet (with huge 7'4 wingspan) and Frye is just under 6'10 with 7'2.5 wingspan. Thurmond was 6'11 barefeet with huge wingspan (longer than Wilt's 7'8). Favors is thicker than Thurmond (265 lbs compared to 240 lbs) but it's not very important because Nate was all pure muscles.