What 25 players would you add for the 75th year?

[dhsilv2]

Howard can replace Rodman.
Rodman is not even in the Hall of Fame. Miller and McGRady are.

rodman didn't make the first list but is in the hall of fame...

[dhsilv2]

In 96-97 season the NBA came up with a list of the top 50 players off all time to coumarate the anniversary. What about adding an additional 25 players for the 75th year anniversary? My list is not in any order, it's not scientific, just names that popped into my head at the time. Who would you add? Who would you remove?

1. Kobe Bryant
2. Tim Duncan
3. Lebron James
4. Dirk Nowitski
5. Kevin Garnett
6. Ray Allen
7. Chris Bosh
8. Carmelo Anthony
9. Dwight Howard
10. Kawhi Leonard
11. Jason Kidd
12. Steph Curry
13. Kevin Durant
14. James Harden
15. Giannis antetokounmpo
16. Chris Paul
17. Russell Westbrook
18. Klay Thompson
19. Allen Iverson
20. Paul Pierce
21. Anthony Davis
22. Damian lillard
23. Dwayne Wade
24. Steve Nash
25. Nikola Jokic

From your list, I'd remove 7 players: Allen, Bosh, Klay, Dame, Giannis, AD and Jokic.
The last 3 are too young to be on this.

And replace them with:
- Dominique Wilkins
- Reggie Miller
- Dikembe Mutombo
- Tracy McGrady
- Chris Webber
- Vince Carter
- Yao Ming (might as well get them global $$)

Webber over Giannis? How in the hell can you do that?

5x all nba, 4x all defense, 2x MVP, 1x finals MVP, 1x DPOY, 1x MIP, 1x AS MVP, NBA Champ

vs
5x allstar 5x all nba, 1x ROY

How can you even compare that?

[dhsilv2]

Someone needs to tell me why Vince is getting his named mentioned so many times. I get he is a very popular player but on the court wise, his name doesnt deserve to be in this discussion.

Wasn't only me thinking the same thing then. I like Vince, a lot, but he didn't do anything special in his career outside of playing for so long vs other guys to be getting so much mention.

I'm thinking the same with TMac, yes, great peak, but....

TMAC was a 7x all nba selection. It wasn't like he was a 3 or 4 time guy. After that sure he just had one more full season at 31, but 7 years of all nba play is more than a lot of guys had on this list.

[AbeVigodaLive]

From your list, I'd remove 7 players: Allen, Bosh, Klay, Dame, Giannis, AD and Jokic.
The last 3 are too young to be on this.

And replace them with:
- Dominique Wilkins
- Reggie Miller
- Dikembe Mutombo
- Tracy McGrady
- Chris Webber
- Vince Carter
- Yao Ming (might as well get them global $$)

I agree with some of these.
But I can't see any argument for keeping Giannis and Ray Allen off in favor of Tmac, Webber and Carter.

Kind of hard to have either Reggie Miller OR Ray Allen without the other, isn't it?

Miller (1,389 games):
18.2 ppg
3.0 reb
3.0 apg
47.1% fg
39.5% 3fg (2,560 makes)
174.4 WS
18.4 PER
3 All League, 5 ASG
Memorable playoff performances

vs.

Allen (1,300 games):
18.9 ppg
4.1 reb
3.4 apg
45.2% fg
40.0% 3fg (2,973 makes)
145.1 WS
18.6 PER
2 All League, 10 ASG
Memorable playoff performances

A person could argue for or against either one... but there'd be another person waiting in the wings on the other side of the argument. So fair or not... they're sort of a package deal together.

[AbeVigodaLive]

Someone needs to tell me why Vince is getting his named mentioned so many times. I get he is a very popular player but on the court wise, his name doesnt deserve to be in this discussion.

Wasn't only me thinking the same thing then. I like Vince, a lot, but he didn't do anything special in his career outside of playing for so long vs other guys to be getting so much mention.

I'm thinking the same with TMac, yes, great peak, but....

TMAC was a 7x all nba selection. It wasn't like he was a 3 or 4 time guy. After that sure he just had one more full season at 31, but 7 years of all nba play is more than a lot of guys had on this list.

Dunno for certain if McGrady would make it. But the NBA definitely decided peak was important when they added Walton to the '96 list.

Granted, he was THE guy for a champion, and an MVP, but he only had two All League selections.

[dhsilv2]

Wasn't only me thinking the same thing then. I like Vince, a lot, but he didn't do anything special in his career outside of playing for so long vs other guys to be getting so much mention.

I'm thinking the same with TMac, yes, great peak, but....

TMAC was a 7x all nba selection. It wasn't like he was a 3 or 4 time guy. After that sure he just had one more full season at 31, but 7 years of all nba play is more than a lot of guys had on this list.

Dunno for certain if McGrady would make it. But the NBA definitely decided peak was important when they added Walton to the '96 list.

Granted, he was THE guy for a champion, and an MVP, but he only had two All League selections.

Walton is certainly a challenging guy to rank, but yeah Walton vs Wilkens is a great discussion.

[WarriorGM]

TMAC was a 7x all nba selection. It wasn't like he was a 3 or 4 time guy. After that sure he just had one more full season at 31, but 7 years of all nba play is more than a lot of guys had on this list.

Dunno for certain if McGrady would make it. But the NBA definitely decided peak was important when they added Walton to the '96 list.

Granted, he was THE guy for a champion, and an MVP, but he only had two All League selections.

Walton is certainly a challenging guy to rank, but yeah Walton vs Wilkens is a great discussion.

I think it becomes a much easier decision if you think of each of those 75 years as being represented by a player.

[AbeVigodaLive]

Dunno for certain if McGrady would make it. But the NBA definitely decided peak was important when they added Walton to the '96 list.

Granted, he was THE guy for a champion, and an MVP, but he only had two All League selections.

Walton is certainly a challenging guy to rank, but yeah Walton vs Wilkens is a great discussion.

I think it becomes a much easier decision if you think of each of those 75 years as being represented by a player.

It's called "Greatest Players" right?

And in that case, I'd most certainly consider Walton as one of the "greatest."

[dhsilv2]

Dunno for certain if McGrady would make it. But the NBA definitely decided peak was important when they added Walton to the '96 list.

Granted, he was THE guy for a champion, and an MVP, but he only had two All League selections.

Walton is certainly a challenging guy to rank, but yeah Walton vs Wilkens is a great discussion.

I think it becomes a much easier decision if you think of each of those 75 years as being represented by a player.

That would make it a LOT harder imo as you'd skew the results HEAVY for early seasons. So

Bob Feerick vs Joe Fulks
Feerick vs Zaslofsky
Mikan comes in so ok
So now Groza or Schayes
Groza Macauley or Arizin or Schayes?

I think you get my point.

More players should come from the last 20 years than the first 20 years, there are vastly more players today.

[dhsilv2]

Walton is certainly a challenging guy to rank, but yeah Walton vs Wilkens is a great discussion.

I think it becomes a much easier decision if you think of each of those 75 years as being represented by a player.

It's called "Greatest Players" right?

And in that case, I'd most certainly consider Walton as one of the "greatest."

So does Derick Rose make the list? What about Alex Groza who was banned from the league but had two epic first two years?

[AbeVigodaLive]

I think it becomes a much easier decision if you think of each of those 75 years as being represented by a player.

It's called "Greatest Players" right?

And in that case, I'd most certainly consider Walton as one of the "greatest."

So does Derick Rose make the list? What about Alex Groza who was banned from the league but had two epic first two years?

No. Derrick Rose doesn't have the resume. Groza played 300 fewer games than Walton... and doesn't have as many accolades. And there are consequences for fixing games.

[dhsilv2]

It's called "Greatest Players" right?

And in that case, I'd most certainly consider Walton as one of the "greatest."

So does Derick Rose make the list? What about Alex Groza who was banned from the league but had two epic first two years?

No. Derrick Rose doesn't have the resume. Groza played 300 fewer games than Walton... and doesn't have as many accolades. And there are consequences for fixing games.

Then what's Walton's case of Wilkins? And Groza fixed college games, not professional ones.

And btw, walton made 2 allstar teams in his career, this is hardly some stacked resume. Rose even has him beat with 3.

[jokeboy86]

So does Derick Rose make the list? What about Alex Groza who was banned from the league but had two epic first two years?

No. Derrick Rose doesn't have the resume. Groza played 300 fewer games than Walton... and doesn't have as many accolades. And there are consequences for fixing games.

Then what's Walton's case of Wilkins? And Groza fixed college games, not professional ones.

And btw, walton made 2 allstar teams in his career, this is hardly some stacked resume. Rose even has him beat with 3.

Eh but who really cares about all-star games. I don't because its about who the fans like not necessarily who's the best. Bosh and Pierce both have at least 10 and if I were creating my own personal list I wouldn't consider either as 2 of the greatest NBA players of all time. I think the thing with Walton is when he was healthy(very briefly) I bet there were some people back then who could make the case that he was among the top 5 players in the league. I'm sure after the title some people may have even had him as the best. I don't know what point in their careers were Wilkins or Rose ever considered among the top 5 players in the league or the best while they were playing.

[dhsilv2]

No. Derrick Rose doesn't have the resume. Groza played 300 fewer games than Walton... and doesn't have as many accolades. And there are consequences for fixing games.

Then what's Walton's case of Wilkins? And Groza fixed college games, not professional ones.

And btw, walton made 2 allstar teams in his career, this is hardly some stacked resume. Rose even has him beat with 3.

Eh but who really cares about all-star games. I don't because its about who the fans like not necessarily who's the best. Bosh and Pierce both have at least 10 and if I were creating my own personal list I wouldn't consider either as 2 of the greatest NBA players of all time. I think the thing with Walton is when he was healthy(very briefly) I bet there were some people back then who could make the case that he was among the top 5 players in the league. I'm sure after the title some people may have even had him as the best. I don't know what point in their careers were Wilkins or Rose ever considered among the top 5 players in the league or the best while they were playing.

You think Pierce wasn't a top 25 player? Even Bosh was likely that for his allstar selections. The allstar team outside of a few fan votes which are crazy, are generally picking roughly the right 25-30 players.

Walton might have been when he played a top 5 guy and certainly was the year he won the title. But that was his only healthy star level season. Even his other allstar year he only played 58 games. And he played a whole 2 games in the playoffs that year...again what good is a player if he can't stay healthy enough to get on the floor?

As for Wilkins, 87 he has a legit case for top 5.

But what's more valuable and important to the history of the game? 1 insane epic season or a decade as a top 25 player?

[AbeVigodaLive]

Then what's Walton's case of Wilkins? And Groza fixed college games, not professional ones.

And btw, walton made 2 allstar teams in his career, this is hardly some stacked resume. Rose even has him beat with 3.

Eh but who really cares about all-star games. I don't because its about who the fans like not necessarily who's the best. Bosh and Pierce both have at least 10 and if I were creating my own personal list I wouldn't consider either as 2 of the greatest NBA players of all time. I think the thing with Walton is when he was healthy(very briefly) I bet there were some people back then who could make the case that he was among the top 5 players in the league. I'm sure after the title some people may have even had him as the best. I don't know what point in their careers were Wilkins or Rose ever considered among the top 5 players in the league or the best while they were playing.

You think Pierce wasn't a top 25 player? Even Bosh was likely that for his allstar selections. The allstar team outside of a few fan votes which are crazy, are generally picking roughly the right 25-30 players.

Walton might have been when he played a top 5 guy and certainly was the year he won the title. But that was his only healthy star level season. Even his other allstar year he only played 58 games. And he played a whole 2 games in the playoffs that year...again what good is a player if he can't stay healthy enough to get on the floor?

As for Wilkins, 87 he has a legit case for top 5.

But what's more valuable and important to the history of the game? 1 insane epic season or a decade as a top 25 player?

Walton won the MVP the year he played only 58 games... he won the title the season before while coming in 2nd for MVP.

He played only 14 games over the next 4 seasons. A real shame. He ended up suing the Portland team physician for negligence. Walton didn't know his foot was broken until he went to his own doctors.

[Scalabrine]

In 96-97 season the NBA came up with a list of the top 50 players off all time to coumarate the anniversary. What about adding an additional 25 players for the 75th year anniversary? My list is not in any order, it's not scientific, just names that popped into my head at the time. Who would you add? Who would you remove?

1.Lebron James
2.Tim Duncan
3.Kobe Bryant
4.Dirk Nowitski
5.Kevin Garnett
6.Ray Allen
7.Chris Bosh
8.Carmelo Anthony
9.Dwight Howard
10.Kawhi Lenoard
11.Jason Kidd
12.Steph Curry
13.Kevin Durant
14.James Harden
15. Giannis antetokounmpo
16. Chris Paul
17. Russell Westbrook
18. Klay Thompson
19. Allen Iverson
20. Paul Pierce
21. Anthony Davis
22. Damian lillard
23. Dwayne Wade
24. Steve Nash
25. Nikola Jokic

The reds are the nos. The oranges are the maybes.

Instead of those would likely be McGrady, Carter, Reggie Miller, Gary Payton and someone like Nique or Hill or Webber (over Bosh in particular). Allen could still slip in amongst that group too, but he's a terminally overrated player who barely made any All NBA teams. Jokic will need time. As will Lillard as a borderline figure. Being generous to Kawhi and Giannis who don't have full career numbers. Kawhi especially is dicey because he doesn't seem to actually like to play basketball, and might never put up full career stats.

Yup, no way a list can have Bosh on it but not Webber.

https://stathead.com/basketball/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&player_id1=boshch01&player_id2=webbech01

[dhsilv2]

Eh but who really cares about all-star games. I don't because its about who the fans like not necessarily who's the best. Bosh and Pierce both have at least 10 and if I were creating my own personal list I wouldn't consider either as 2 of the greatest NBA players of all time. I think the thing with Walton is when he was healthy(very briefly) I bet there were some people back then who could make the case that he was among the top 5 players in the league. I'm sure after the title some people may have even had him as the best. I don't know what point in their careers were Wilkins or Rose ever considered among the top 5 players in the league or the best while they were playing.

You think Pierce wasn't a top 25 player? Even Bosh was likely that for his allstar selections. The allstar team outside of a few fan votes which are crazy, are generally picking roughly the right 25-30 players.

Walton might have been when he played a top 5 guy and certainly was the year he won the title. But that was his only healthy star level season. Even his other allstar year he only played 58 games. And he played a whole 2 games in the playoffs that year...again what good is a player if he can't stay healthy enough to get on the floor?

As for Wilkins, 87 he has a legit case for top 5.

But what's more valuable and important to the history of the game? 1 insane epic season or a decade as a top 25 player?

Walton won the MVP the year he played only 58 games... he won the title the season before while coming in 2nd for MVP.

He played only 14 games over the next 4 seasons. A real shame. He ended up suing the Portland team physician for negligence. Walton didn't know his foot was broken until he went to his own doctors.

Yeah sorry, always mix up the mvp and title. None the less his career was sadly short and ultimately he did less than these 10x allstar imo, even with the MVP and ring to his name. It sucks but it is what it is. Same with Rose to a lesser level (he wasn't as good as walton), but his career may end up being just as valuable if he can keep it up.

[jokeboy86]

Then what's Walton's case of Wilkins? And Groza fixed college games, not professional ones.

And btw, walton made 2 allstar teams in his career, this is hardly some stacked resume. Rose even has him beat with 3.

Eh but who really cares about all-star games. I don't because its about who the fans like not necessarily who's the best. Bosh and Pierce both have at least 10 and if I were creating my own personal list I wouldn't consider either as 2 of the greatest NBA players of all time. I think the thing with Walton is when he was healthy(very briefly) I bet there were some people back then who could make the case that he was among the top 5 players in the league. I'm sure after the title some people may have even had him as the best. I don't know what point in their careers were Wilkins or Rose ever considered among the top 5 players in the league or the best while they were playing.

You think Pierce wasn't a top 25 player? Even Bosh was likely that for his allstar selections. The allstar team outside of a few fan votes which are crazy, are generally picking roughly the right 25-30 players.

Walton might have been when he played a top 5 guy and certainly was the year he won the title. But that was his only healthy star level season. Even his other allstar year he only played 58 games. And he played a whole 2 games in the playoffs that year...again what good is a player if he can't stay healthy enough to get on the floor?

As for Wilkins, 87 he has a legit case for top 5.

But what's more valuable and important to the history of the game? 1 insane epic season or a decade as a top 25 player?

No I get it for Walton it's incredibly hard and I can only go off the people who saw him play in college and NBA and swear he was one of the best players they had ever seen. To me Wilkins should've been on the first list and I have a feeling he was left out because his career at the time was unfairly compared to that of Magic, Bird, Jordan, Isaiah, and even Barkley's as far as team success.

As for Pierce and Bosh, absolutely they were consistently considered as top 25 players during their careers. But neither of them were ever top 5 nor do I consider Pierce a top 25 player of all time if you're suggesting that.

[hippesthippo]

1. Kobe
2. Lebron
3. AD
4. Steve Nash
5. Westbrook
6/7. Gasol brothers
8. Dwight
9. Rodman
10. Payton
11. Robert Horry
12. Derek Fisher
13. Melo
14. Eddie Jones
15. Goodrich
16. Mikan
17. Artest
18. McAdoo
19. Mychal Thompson
20. Rambis
21. Lamar Odom
22. Michael Cooper
23. Byron Scott
24. Rick Fox
25. Mikkelsen

This man homers

[TheBobster]

I think it becomes a much easier decision if you think of each of those 75 years as being represented by a player.

It's called "Greatest Players" right?

And in that case, I'd most certainly consider Walton as one of the "greatest."

So does Derick Rose make the list? What about Alex Groza who was banned from the league but had two epic first two years?

Joe Fulks should be on it, and what about Maurice Stokes?