Spurs, Seattle...way past Jordan's prime to consider changing teams. He would have been interested before he won his first ring in 1991. I think he would have gone either to Portland or LA. In Portland, he could have teamed with Clyde Drexler. But I think LA would have been a better fit (Jordan wouldn't have known about Magic coming out with HIV a in later on). But a healthy unselfish Magic and Jordan could have teamed up to be the best backcourt ever and Jordan would have some of the easiest scoring opportunities in his life.
I agree that the Bulls may come out of the East next year. They are deeper than the Heat, have one of the best defensive coaches, and the pieces seem to fit together better. Plus Noah and Boozer are more physical than Bosh and Ilgauskas.
The Heat will be very good, but the playoffs is all about matchups and team chemistry. Boston was a good example of putting 3 stars together that compliment each other (the post presence, the shooter, the slasher in KG, Allen, and Pierce). With Miami, you have 2 premier slashers and Bosh who is not known for his post ups but rather his shooting ability. The Heat will have to prove themselves against physical teams like the Bulls, Celtics, and Magic to earn the right to play in the Finals.
<----- Cousy was a great player no doubt in that he changed the NBA. But Rude is right about the amount of competition at the time. Stick any of the great PGs of today on that Celtics team and they still win. Plus, I've watched videos of Cousy play--he is definitely not better than Isiah, Magic, Nash, Stockton, Payton, or any of the great PGs of the past few decades. Better competition and athletes today.
Stockton, Barkley. Scottie Pippen may have been a better version of Havlicek. However, very solid list Rude. Seems like you went with greats that ALSO won.
Nothing like sticking a knife in the hearts of Cleveland fans. I have never been a fan of Ohio sports, but I feel awful for what they went through.
And I'm tired of people saying Lebron didn't have talent around him. The whole team was built to compliment Lebron with his buy-in, and they had all-stars, near all-stars, and solid role players over the years like Mo Williams, Antawn Jamison, Ilgauskas, Shaq, Donyell Marshall, Ben Wallace, Anthony Parker, Delonte West, JJ Hickson, Varejao, Carlos Boozer, etc... He's had more talent around him than many of the Lakers title teams of the last decade, which featured Kobe, one other all-star in Shaq or Gasol, a few role players, and most of the time a weak bench. Only difference is that one superstar found a knack for giving up in key playoff games...
NY doesn't have the money to make this scenario work so easily...BUT...assuming they can pull it off, I would say it could be a better combo than in Miami. Chris Paul is a better playmaker than Wade or Lebron. And I think these 3 can mesh their games better than the 3 in Miami, where you have at least 2 alpha dogs...
Not sure about this trade. LA really needs outside shooting and Vujacic provides that plus aggressive D (albeit some bone-headed moves like against Dragic in the WCF). He can also play PG in a pinch, and Phil Jackson loves combo guards in the triangle. In addition, with an expiring contract next year, Vujacic will probably have a good year and be valuable in a trade mid-season if LA wants. McGrady is coming off of some serious knee injuries and has yet to prove himself again. If LA really wanted TMac, I bet they could get him for the remainer of the mid level exception for the year, then sign him to the full MLE next year if he performs.
Good list overall. Some other players I might have considered are Charles Barkley, Dr J, Isiah Thomas, Kevin Garnett, and possibly Dwyane Wade. Lebron James might be in the top 15 if he had a title under his belt given his strong all-around game. But tough to argue against your list. Looking forward to the counter argument.
Gasol put up better all-around stats than most PFs in the game...as a Second Option. But what's most impressive is the fact that the Lakers have won about 80% of the games he has played in, and rarely lose more than twice in a row (didn't even happen until after 2 full years with the team). 3 straight trips to the Finals and 2 wins puts him rare territory.
Garnett is one of the best players ever. But he's old and Pau is getting in his prime. Pau outplayed him in the Finals. Just as Pau outplayed Boozer and Amare in the previous rounds. If the case is to be made of the best 5 PFs in today's game, then there's no way you put KG, Boozer, and Amare ahead of Pau.
Must say thought that both sides have great arguments so far, and Argos you are doing a heck of a job in a nearly impossible task IMO.
I have Timmy on my top 10 players of all-time. Best PF ever (although he really is a center), but the way he has aged, he is no longer the top PF in the game.
Gasol definitely in the top 5 for PFs, and maybe the best all-around big today. Not as good offensively as Dirk, not as good defensively as Dwight Howard, but who else can put up around 20-10 as a second option on a team, run an offense, play great offense and defense, and is a pretty good passer? Oh, and a couple rings doesn't hurt either.
Magic and Bird both had more steals per game than Kobe, but no one considers them great defenders like Kobe.
MVP is the best you got? We all know it doesn't go to the best player every year in the league (Nowitzki, Nash) so that's a worthless point. If it did, Kobe would have at least 3-4 MVPs already. Kobe even said (and I think Jordan would feel the same way) he doesn't care about regular season MVP awards, all that matters is winning championships. If Jordan only won 1 or 2 titles, not as many would consider him the greatest.
So it comes down to all-around game and winning. Kobe has a better all-around game able to dominate BOTH offensively and defensively AND he has WON more. Check. Mate.
Not very strong arguments from the anti Kobe crowd saying Bird played in a tougher era (which may not even be accurate with the better team defenses these days).
The problem I have with Russell is that he was one-dimensional. One of the very best ever at defense and rebounding but sucked at offense. Here's a guy taller than everyone until Wilt comes along, and he averages 44% FG and 15 ppg? He had a team of hall of famers when other teams only had 1 or 2 at best.
Russell was in the right place at the right time. You put Hakeem, Alonzo, Wilt, or any other top center on that 60s Celtics squad and they would have won a lot too. Plus, the best players should be able to play in any era and dominate. Russell at 6-9 and 220 would either be a SF or PF in today's game. Can't see him dominating the way he did rebounding and blocking shots on guys much taller, bigger, stronger, and more athletic. He'd average about 10-15 ppg, 10-15 rpg today. Put Jordan or Kobe back in the 60s and they would still average around 30 ppg and dominate defensively. All-around game and ability to play in any era are the difference makers.
Better career? How many times has Bird made the all-defensive team, let alone the 1st team? When did Bird ever have to lead a weak team by scoring 35 ppg? Can't remember the last time Bird scored 81 in a game, or outscored another team in the 1st 3 quarters. Can't remember Bird leading Team USA to a gold in the Olympics in a clutch 2nd half performance.
MJ took more shots than Bird, and Bird shot the ball more efficiently. Does that make Bird better than Jordan?
Unless you are delusional, you should feel that Jordan was the better player because he had a better ALL-AROUND GAME in addition to WINNING more. Same goes with Kobe--he has a better all-around game and has won more. Only a Kobe hater would deny these simple facts (and I know there are a lot out there).
My comment was in response to an earlier remark that Bird was the leader and best player on the 1981 Celtics in the Finals. Fact is, he wasn't even the best player in the series. Kobe has had a much more successful run in the Finals than Bird including higher scoring averages, higher percent of team's scoring, more Finals appearances, and more wins (which matters most).
Interesting fact for those who bash Kobe during the 1st 3 Finals he won but ignore the 1981 Finals... Against the 42-40 Houston Rockets in the 1981 Finals, Bird shot 42% in the series and averaged 15 points and 15 rebounds... Including a game where Robert Reid held Bird to 8 points! Don't remember any game where Kobe was held to that in the Finals, and Bryant never averaged as low as 15 ppg in the Finals, even playing option 1A to Shaq.
The Heat will be very good, but the playoffs is all about matchups and team chemistry. Boston was a good example of putting 3 stars together that compliment each other (the post presence, the shooter, the slasher in KG, Allen, and Pierce). With Miami, you have 2 premier slashers and Bosh who is not known for his post ups but rather his shooting ability. The Heat will have to prove themselves against physical teams like the Bulls, Celtics, and Magic to earn the right to play in the Finals.
And I'm tired of people saying Lebron didn't have talent around him. The whole team was built to compliment Lebron with his buy-in, and they had all-stars, near all-stars, and solid role players over the years like Mo Williams, Antawn Jamison, Ilgauskas, Shaq, Donyell Marshall, Ben Wallace, Anthony Parker, Delonte West, JJ Hickson, Varejao, Carlos Boozer, etc... He's had more talent around him than many of the Lakers title teams of the last decade, which featured Kobe, one other all-star in Shaq or Gasol, a few role players, and most of the time a weak bench. Only difference is that one superstar found a knack for giving up in key playoff games...
Garnett is one of the best players ever. But he's old and Pau is getting in his prime. Pau outplayed him in the Finals. Just as Pau outplayed Boozer and Amare in the previous rounds. If the case is to be made of the best 5 PFs in today's game, then there's no way you put KG, Boozer, and Amare ahead of Pau.
Must say thought that both sides have great arguments so far, and Argos you are doing a heck of a job in a nearly impossible task IMO.
Gasol definitely in the top 5 for PFs, and maybe the best all-around big today. Not as good offensively as Dirk, not as good defensively as Dwight Howard, but who else can put up around 20-10 as a second option on a team, run an offense, play great offense and defense, and is a pretty good passer? Oh, and a couple rings doesn't hurt either.
MVP is the best you got? We all know it doesn't go to the best player every year in the league (Nowitzki, Nash) so that's a worthless point. If it did, Kobe would have at least 3-4 MVPs already. Kobe even said (and I think Jordan would feel the same way) he doesn't care about regular season MVP awards, all that matters is winning championships. If Jordan only won 1 or 2 titles, not as many would consider him the greatest.
So it comes down to all-around game and winning. Kobe has a better all-around game able to dominate BOTH offensively and defensively AND he has WON more. Check. Mate.
Russell was in the right place at the right time. You put Hakeem, Alonzo, Wilt, or any other top center on that 60s Celtics squad and they would have won a lot too. Plus, the best players should be able to play in any era and dominate. Russell at 6-9 and 220 would either be a SF or PF in today's game. Can't see him dominating the way he did rebounding and blocking shots on guys much taller, bigger, stronger, and more athletic. He'd average about 10-15 ppg, 10-15 rpg today. Put Jordan or Kobe back in the 60s and they would still average around 30 ppg and dominate defensively. All-around game and ability to play in any era are the difference makers.
Yeah you're right. It is as simple as that.
Unless you are delusional, you should feel that Jordan was the better player because he had a better ALL-AROUND GAME in addition to WINNING more. Same goes with Kobe--he has a better all-around game and has won more. Only a Kobe hater would deny these simple facts (and I know there are a lot out there).