ESPN NBA 75th Anniversary Team Rankings - Reactions

[Statlanta]

Giannis way too high is what stands out for me.

[SpreeS]

Durant over Dirk is quite lulzy to me. Dirk had a peak that was higher, was a better playoff performer, had a longer career. What is the case for Durant?

Six time NBA first team

How many 1st team KD would have if he would played with prime KG/Duncan and Lebron?

[alevirfe]

Shaq/KD/KG/CP3 are definitely too low

Shaq to me is a top 5 player all time. Durant easily is top 10. KG/CP3 are top 15 players easily

to make room, I would move some of the older generation dudes, Kobe, and even Duncan a few spots

curious, who you guys got between KD & Duncan? Shaq & Duncan? I love Timmy and respect the hell out of everything he accomplished, but from a talent perspective I take both guys before him. same exact thing if you replace Timmy with Kobe in my questions above

[BoatsNZones]

Giannis way too high is what stands out for me.

You could of course argue him lower, but he's definitely not way too high. He's played nearly a decade now (as an iron man) with 2 MVPs, a DPOY and a ship/Finals MVP. Only Jordan, Hakeem and Russell have that combination of accolades (Russell not technically as they did not exist, but he had them). And he has more All NBA 1st Teams (D and regular) + potentially more accolades coming in two months.

You would have to really lean on longevity over prime to have him outside of the top 20 after this season.

[MrBigShot]

KD slightly too high, Hakeem slightly too low. DWade is also too low, he was absolutely incredible at his peak, easily comparable to guys in the 14-20 range. If you didn't get to see young DWade play you missed out. Giannis has more or less earned his spot by winning and accomplishing everything in basketball.

And I have no clue who's wife Dwight slept with at ESPN but his exclusion is downright comical. He's better than at least a dozen guys at least, and that's being conservative.

[BBallFreak]

Amazing how Brutally underrated Pierce still is with this board ...

That's ESPN's rankings. Not this board's rankings...

[sp6r=underrated]

Dwight Howard faces a TO problem, his personality is so abrasive that he gets punished unfairly on lists such as these. It does matter that both guys irriritated so many they played with that they became vagabonds for stretches of their career.

But it has been taken way too far.

[rand]

Durant over Dirk is quite lulzy to me. Dirk had a peak that was higher, was a better playoff performer, had a longer career. What is the case for Durant?

Six time NBA first team

Durant has 6 First teams and 3 2nds. Dirk has 4 first teams and 5 2nds. I don't see 1 as so much better than the other considering they didn't overlap. Especially when you consider Dirk's 2011 campaign would have resulted in 1st NBA and Durant 2nd which makes the All NBA teams equal.

I don't understand any of the rationale in your post.

If two players are both All-NBA nine times, and 1st or 2nd team every times, but one has six first teams to the other's four, how can there not be a clear winner here? The variables couldn't have lined up better for a comparison (same # of selections, and only 1st and 2nds), making it as simple as 6 > 4. The non-overlap argument doesn't make sense to me. They're only separated by a decade in entry points into the league. It's not like comparing Jordan and Russell.

Only a handful of players on this Top-75 list overlapped with each other for the majority of their careers. Are you saying only All-NBA teams can't be compare between them but other attributes like stats, MVPs, and rings can be? That seems arbitrary to me, and if we can't put together any comparison of these things cross eras (especially when the players' careers do partially overlap), how can we compare any two players who didn't share the same seasons for the majority of their careers?

I also don't understand what you mean by "Dirk's 2011 campaign would have resulted in 1st NBA". Would have if what? This also is one of the three seasons where they have overlapped and you've refused to count it for reasons I don't understand after making a big deal out of overlap.

As for the original question, KD vs Dirk, I think it's debatable but I'd go with KD. I certainly don't think it's laughable to choose either. In fact the suggestion that it could be laughable is laughable to me. We could do a long statistical analysis but what it boils down to is that KD's non-injury seasons tend to be statistically marginally better than Dirk's non-injury seasons, but that KD has played 7 fewer career seasons thus far so he lags behind Dirk in regular season aggregates like WS and VORP (but already beats Dirk in playoff WS and VORP). RAPM comparisons are very close between them, and are only useful for the regular season anyway.

As far as peaks go, I'd lean toward 2017 KD over 2011 Dirk but it's close and the radical differences in quality of supporting casts makes a comparison difficult to begin with. As far as career goes, when KD is done in about a half-dozen years I don't think it will appear close anymore. How one wishes to interpret remaining seasons for the players whose careers have not completed is questionable. For instance, Giannis is ranked #18, one spot ahead of West and three ahead of KG. If we're totally discounting all of the Giannis' remaining career, I don't know how he can be ranked ahead of either. But if we can factor in even a very conservative estimate for the remainder of Giannis' career, ranking him ahead of both is a necessity.

At any rate, I think the guy with the real beef regarding being ranked behind KD is Hakeem. I have no idea how that could have happened.

[sp6r=underrated]

Six time NBA first team

Durant has 6 First teams and 3 2nds. Dirk has 4 first teams and 5 2nds. I don't see 1 as so much better than the other considering they didn't overlap. Especially when you consider Dirk's 2011 campaign would have resulted in 1st NBA and Durant 2nd which makes the All NBA teams equal.

I don't understand any of the rationale in your post.

If two players are both All-NBA nine times, and 1st or 2nd team every times, but one has six first teams to the other's four, how can there not be a clear winner here (before you consider the false non-overlap issue)? The variables couldn't have lined up better for a comparison (same # of selections, and only 1st and 2nds), making it as simple as 6 > 4.

As for the non-overlap, only a handful of players on this Top-75 list overlapped with each other for the majority of their careers. Are you saying only All-NBA teams can't be compare between them but other attributes like stats, MVPs, and rings can be? That seems arbitrary to me, and if we can't put together any comparison of these things cross eras (especially when the players' careers do partially overlap), how can we compare any two players who didn't share the same seasons for the majority of their careers?

I also don't understand what you mean by "Dirk's 2011 campaign would have resulted in 1st NBA". Would have if what?

What I mean was if the 2011 PS was included Dirk would have unanimously gotten 1st team over Durant, who would have gotten the 2nd so you're left with the exact same count 5-4. Even on RS alone the Mavs had 2 more wins than Thunder despite Durant's supporting cast of Russ, Ibaka and Westbrook.

Does anyone think Durant's 2011 campaign was better than Dirk? I don't even think his mom would. But if you're making a big deal about All NBA teams you have to claim that Durant's 2011 campaign was better otherwise there is no difference.

[rand]

Durant has 6 First teams and 3 2nds. Dirk has 4 first teams and 5 2nds. I don't see 1 as so much better than the other considering they didn't overlap. Especially when you consider Dirk's 2011 campaign would have resulted in 1st NBA and Durant 2nd which makes the All NBA teams equal.

I don't understand any of the rationale in your post.

If two players are both All-NBA nine times, and 1st or 2nd team every times, but one has six first teams to the other's four, how can there not be a clear winner here (before you consider the false non-overlap issue)? The variables couldn't have lined up better for a comparison (same # of selections, and only 1st and 2nds), making it as simple as 6 > 4.

As for the non-overlap, only a handful of players on this Top-75 list overlapped with each other for the majority of their careers. Are you saying only All-NBA teams can't be compare between them but other attributes like stats, MVPs, and rings can be? That seems arbitrary to me, and if we can't put together any comparison of these things cross eras (especially when the players' careers do partially overlap), how can we compare any two players who didn't share the same seasons for the majority of their careers?

I also don't understand what you mean by "Dirk's 2011 campaign would have resulted in 1st NBA". Would have if what?

What I mean was if the 2011 PS was included Dirk would have unanimously gotten 1st team over Durant, who would have gotten the 2nd so you're left with the exact same count 5-4. Even on RS alone the Mavs had 2 more wins than Thunder despite Durant's supporting cast of Russ, Ibaka and Westbrook.

Does anyone think Durant's 2011 campaign was better than Dirk? I don't even think his mom would. But if you're making a big deal about All NBA teams you have to claim that Durant's 2011 campaign was better otherwise there is no difference.

Ok, but this is true for a very large number of all All-NBA selections, including other seasons for both of these players. Either someone thinks a different player should have won 1st team based on the regular season or would have if postseasons were included. It doesn't seem valid to selectively choose a particular season for adjustment in one H2H comparison.

[kivancb]

At what aspect of game was James Worthy better than Paul Pierce?

Umm yeah- absolutely none.

[LAL1947]

Shaq/KD/KG/CP3 are definitely too low

Shaq to me is a top 5 player all time. Durant easily is top 10. KG/CP3 are top 15 players easily

to make room, I would move some of the older generation dudes, Kobe, and even Duncan a few spots

curious, who you guys got between KD & Duncan? Shaq & Duncan? I love Timmy and respect the hell out of everything he accomplished, but from a talent perspective I take both guys before him. same exact thing if you replace Timmy with Kobe in my questions above

Kobe was the most skilled player I've seen until date. So I'm not sure how you could make an argument for KD (better at shooting?) or Shaq (dainty feet for such a big guy?) having more talent, although I'd like to see what you come up with.

Partially agreed with your point about Duncan though. I think he's borderline Top-10 now.

My Top-10:
1) Jordan
2) Wilt
3) Lebron
4) Larry
5) Kobe
6) Magic
7) Hakeem
8) Kareem
9) Shaq
10) Duncan or Bill Russell (with Durant, Giannis, etc knocking on their door but most likely not opening it)

[70sFan]

At what aspect of game was James Worthy better than Paul Pierce?

Umm yeah- absolutely none.

Post game, transition offense, finishing inside.

That said, I'd take Pierce clearly ahead of him.

[JN61]

Funny. I have almost exact opposite reactions to your reactions. Baylor too high? Ridiculous. West is far too low. Curry far too high good 5+ spots. Giannis faaaaar too high. Iverson far too high (like good 20 spots). Ray Allen and Miller far too high. And both Westbrook and Harden far too low.

Like honestly how we are supposed to respect this list that has Reggie Miller over Westbrook, Anthony and Gervin (and Harden is barely a spot ahead of Miller). What is the logic here? Apart of media buddy buddy connections? This isn't about basketball at this point.

Edit. Something like this is my top 25:


01. Michael Jordan
02. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
03. LeBron James
04. Magic Johnson
05. Wilt Chamberlain
06. Bill Russell
07. Tim Duncan
08. Larry Bird
09. Hakeem Olajuwon
10. Oscar Robertson
11. Shaquille O'Neal
12. Kobe Bryant
13. Jerry West
14. Kevin Durant
15. Kevin Garnett
16. Dirk Nowitzki
17. Karl Malone
18. David Robinson
19. Charles Barkley
20. Elgin Baylor
21. Dwyane Wade
22. Moses Malone
23. John Havlicek
24. Stephen Curry
25. Paul or Leonard. Not sure.

[JN61]

Giannis way too high is what stands out for me.

You could of course argue him lower, but he's definitely not way too high. He's played nearly a decade now (as an iron man) with 2 MVPs, a DPOY and a ship/Finals MVP. Only Jordan, Hakeem and Russell have that combination of accolades (Russell not technically as they did not exist, but he had them). And he has more All NBA 1st Teams (D and regular) + potentially more accolades coming in two months.

You would have to really lean on longevity over prime to have him outside of the top 20 after this season.

Giannis is certainly far too high. He has played just barely over 600 games. Most players on top 50 list have played almost double the games. What I don't get is people prematurely rank players based on their potential on these lists. Just rank him properly now and accordingly increase his ranking yearly as he goes on as one should do. That said he has certainly put himself in top 40 category by now.

[Mich3006]

T-Mac and VC are too low...

[3ammy3uck3ts]

I mean multiple guys ahead of Wade are just flat out disrespectful and the distance between him and others is as well.

[BrianInPhilly]

I’m still confused how anyone under age 75 can judge guys like Bob Pettit & Bob Cousy. Then how do you even compare guys who play different positions?

Like arguing if say Kawhi Leonard is “better or worse” than Bob Pettit seems utterly pointless to me.

Maybe it’s just me.

[BoatsNZones]

Giannis way too high is what stands out for me.

You could of course argue him lower, but he's definitely not way too high. He's played nearly a decade now (as an iron man) with 2 MVPs, a DPOY and a ship/Finals MVP. Only Jordan, Hakeem and Russell have that combination of accolades (Russell not technically as they did not exist, but he had them). And he has more All NBA 1st Teams (D and regular) + potentially more accolades coming in two months.

You would have to really lean on longevity over prime to have him outside of the top 20 after this season.

Giannis is certainly far too high. He has played just barely over 600 games. Most players on top 50 list have played almost double the games. What I don't get is people prematurely rank players based on their potential on these lists. Just rank him properly now and accordingly increase his ranking yearly as he goes on as one should do. That said he has certainly put himself in top 40 category by now.

Nearly half of your top 10 list has less than 1K games played (we will ignore Wizards Jordan), and you have Kawhi in consideration for the top 25 despite nearly a seasons worth of games less than Giannis.

A player set to earn 4 All NBA 1st Teams, 4 All NBA All D 1st Teams, 2 MVP's and a Finals MVP in a 4 year span has done enough in his career already to surpass the longevity arguments for those outside the top 20. At this point it's just a question of how far up the top 20 list he will rise as long as he's battling for MVP's and titles.

[Kingdibs19]

Lebron is too low.