B/R's Top 50 NBA Players of All-Time

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
If people question Kareem’s athleticism, I’d tell them to watch his fight scene with Bruce Lee in The Game of Death rather than grainy film of Bucks games from the early-mid ‘70s. Maybe Wilt matched that athleticism, and maybe Hakeem matched Kareem’s skills (which were still on full display with the ‘80s Lakers), but no one combined the two like Kareem did. As I said, I’m fine with him at #3 behind MJ and LBJ.
I’m guessing those who are questioning Kareem’s athleticism and dominant impact on a game are succumbing to recency bias. His games only became a part of the regular national broadcasts once Magic(Bird) really popularized the game......by that time he was approaching his mid-30’s and physically a shell of his former self.

The Kareem we are ranking this high was primarily the pre-Magic Kareem that most did not see on a regular basis. That Kareem was the League MVP 5x in a 7-year stretch in the 70’s.
 

snowmanny

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
15,667
Of course, Kareem is also undisputedly the greatest college player of all-time too.
This is the thing. Wherever Kareem is on the list of greatest NBA players, he is higher on the list of all-time overall greatest basketball players.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,096
I do wish people would give some reasons for saying Kareem is overrated by these systems. He was a generational player during his day. Counting rings without Magic or Oscar Robertson seems like it's missing the forest from the trees. By then, teams needed more than one great player to win the championship, despite the fewer number of teams.

The 1972 Bucks were not going to stop the Lakers juggernaut of that same season, Kareem or no Kareem. They underperformed in the playoffs the following season, but then came within a game of winning a second title in 1974 (my opinion is that the Costello got out-coached by Heinsohn during that epic series). Then Robertson retired and Lucius Allen got traded, and Kareem had literally zero supporting cast around him. That 1974-75 Buck team started out 1-13 when Kareem was hurt to start the season; overall that team would go 35-30 when Kareem played, and 3-14 without KAJ.

The Lakers team that Kareem joined wasn't a whole lot better. Gail Goodrich was long past his prime. Then Sharman and West retooled the team, picking up Adrian Dantley, Norm Nixon, and Jamaal Wilkes. Yes, it was Magic that put them over the top in 1980, but is that really any different than Scottie Pippen and his teammates putting MJ over the top?
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
24,651
where I was last at
"I won't stand for all this Kareem slander. Kareem is a Top 5 player of all-time under any circumstances, and has a very strong case for being #1."

Kliq there's no case for slander as what I posted was factually true.

And there were two players mentioned in that post.

My comment was related to an earlier comment I made about the greatness of Oscar, and his ranking in the B/R ranking. Oscar tends to get forgotten by those who never saw him play, and when the game was almost totally dominated by big men.

I agree about KAJ's greatness, and I have him as the 3rd best center after Russell and Wilt, I could even be pushed to consdering him as #2, and a top 5 all-time player. But it also should be remembered in the late 70s where many considered a certain indifference in his play and that he underperformed his considerable skills.

There's a reason this scene is so fucking funny

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ArHNrCvwq4c
,

As there is a big slug of truth in what Bobby says to Roger

and what Roger says to Bobby.
 

Montana Fan

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 18, 2000
8,880
Twin Bridges, Mt.
Lex, that Adrian Dantley note is a good pull! I didn't realize he played for LAL and even less that LA traded James Edwards to get him. That's seriously old school shit right there. Well done.
 

Sam Ray Not

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
8,848
NYC
West is the best small guard of all-time. He isn't technically a point guard like the names listed above, but functionally played as one for the peak of his career and certainly isn't a wing. He was the best perimeter scorer for basically his entire career, and also was perhaps the greatest player of all-time at getting to the free throw line. His 840 free throws made in 1965-66 are still the most ever made in a season, nearly 100 more than Harden made this season. His shooting efficiency, while good but not great by today's standards, were basically revolutionary for guards during his time. His 47 percent career mark is 10 points higher than Cousy's.

In 1965, with Baylor sidelined, West averaged 40.5 ppg during the playoffs, losing to the Celtics in the Finals. Obviously, with the possible exception of Pete Maravich, West is the older player who would have benefited the most from the three point line. He also ranks 32nd all-time in career assists, despite not being a traditional point guard and playing during a time when assists were calculated differently and harder to come by. Oh, and he was also the best defensive guard for his entire career and renowned for his toughness across the league. During his time, West was a combination of James Harden on offense and Marcus Smart on defense
Yeah, I was grappling with how to categorize Jerry West as soon as I posted my list. In absolute terms, he was about the same size as Steph or Nash, though relative to players of his era he was a legit-sized SG; and he typically played alongside a smaller guy (Gail Goodrich, Walt Hazzard, Archie Clark, e.g.) On the other hand, as you say, he was a clearly their lead guard in terms of usage, minutes, and assists.

As an aside: while I know “absolute terms” is not really the spirit of this convo, I gotta say it was kinda shocking to me to watch a good couple-hour chunk of the 1969 Finals and see how (relatively) unskilled West and the other luminaries in that game — Havlicek, Nellie, Wilt, Russell, etc. — were compared to the stars of today. West was able to dominate the games I saw with what appeared to be 2 or 3 dribble moves, and no left hand to speak of. Just many levels less advanced than the playmaking arsenals of Curry, Kyrie, Nash, CP3, e.g.

As far as shooting, while West’s star would no doubt have shined even brighter had he had the three-ball in his era, his career FT% (basically the one context-independent stat we have) was an excellent-but-not-elite 81.4%, suggesting he might not have been as elite from behind the arc as, say, Steph (90.5%) or Nash (90.4%).

That said, we can only compare players to their era, and in that regard, the Logo was totally dominant. And on balance, yeah, he makes a lot more sense under “smalls” than alongside huge wings like LeBron, Bird and KD. I can’t really see a strong argument for him over Steph (both because I’m a Steph stan and because Steph has him by rings, most stats, NBA records, and historic significance). But I think he slots in pretty comfortably at #2 on the list — which has the added benefit of knocking off Isiah, who I always feel is pretty massively overrated.

So, with a measure of recency bias (which I feel is somewhat appropriate given the advances in skill, athleticism, size of talent pool, and prominence of the league):

Smalls
====
Curry
West
Stockton
Nash
CP3
 
Last edited:

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,403
around the way
I won't stand for all this Kareem slander. Kareem is a Top 5 player of all-time under any circumstances, and has a very strong case for being #1.

Kareem is known for his longevity which allowed him to compile some jaw-dropping statistics, but his peak in Milwaukee was outstanding. The 71-72 season (35-16.6) could be argued as being nearly as impressive as Wilt's 50 ppg season in 1961-62.
The bolded stuff has to stop. Kareem was in the league for 10 years before Magic came along. He won once. Kareem was the most productive player of his day, and he's the most productive player ever. But he won once before Magic and only "dragged his team into the finals" one other time in that span.

There were no juggernauts in the 1970s. The field was wide open for a player to drag his team to the finals, if this guy "has a very strong case for being #1". Someday we will look back on Mike Trout and say what a shame it was that he didn't win more, but that's baseball. Well, it's not basketball. The "#1" doesn't win his second ring and have his third finals appearance at 32 years old. By contrast, the two guys immediately below him on the list won their second ring in their third and fourth years in the league respectively.

I do wish people would give some reasons for saying Kareem is overrated by these systems. He was a generational player during his day. Counting rings without Magic or Oscar Robertson seems like it's missing the forest from the trees. By then, teams needed more than one great player to win the championship, despite the fewer number of teams.
Counting rings in basketball certainly doesn't tell the whole story or even close. But production and longevity should be balanced against the guys who clearly had a big impact on their teams winning.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,997
...
As an aside: while I know “absolute terms” is not really the spirit of this convo, I gotta say it was kinda shocking to me to watch a good couple-hour chunk of the 1969 Finals and see how (relatively) unskilled West and the other luminaries in that game — Havlicek, Nellie, Wilt, Russell, etc. — were compared to the stars of today. West was able to dominate the games I saw with what appeared to be 2 or 3 dribble moves, and no left hand to speak of. Just many levels less advanced than the playmaking arsenals of Curry, Kyrie, Nash, CP3, e.g.
...
A lot of this was due to the loosening of travel/palming rules in the late 80s. The stuff that Kyrie and Curry and even a back-of-the-bench PG can do now...you simply can't do that if you're not allowed to effectively palm the ball, hang it in the air, wrap it around your back with your hand, etc. It's actually pretty analogous to saying that West would have been a killer 3-point shooter: his dribbling would have been way more effective under the new rules.

(This is not intended as a criticism of the loosening of traveling/palming restrictions. I prefer the current product.)
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
22,669
The bolded stuff has to stop. Kareem was in the league for 10 years before Magic came along. He won once. Kareem was the most productive player of his day, and he's the most productive player ever. But he won once before Magic and only "dragged his team into the finals" one other time in that span.

There were no juggernauts in the 1970s. The field was wide open for a player to drag his team to the finals, if this guy "has a very strong case for being #1". Someday we will look back on Mike Trout and say what a shame it was that he didn't win more, but that's baseball. Well, it's not basketball. The "#1" doesn't win his second ring and have his third finals appearance at 32 years old. By contrast, the two guys immediately below him on the list won their second ring in their third and fourth years in the league respectively.
I really disagree with this. The case for Kareem as the true GOAT is very straightforward and logical:

- 6x Titles
- 2x Finals MVP
- 6x MVP
- 15x All-NBA (10x First Team)
- 11x All-Defense
- All-time leading scorer
- 3rd all-time in rebounds
- Best college player ever

It has already been discussed that during the gap in titles for Kareem, he had very little help. During that 8 year stretch, Kareem averaged 29-13-4.5 with 3.5 bpg. In the playoffs he averaged 29-16. I guess he should have averaged 35-20, right? Maybe then he wouldn't have had such a big gap in titles? We never hold it against LeBron or Jordan for not winning titles over the early stretches of their career, we accept that is was mainly due to their lack of support, how come Kareem doesn't get that same benefit of the doubt?

The 1970s lacked a truly dominant team like some other decades, but there were plenty of excellent teams to contend with. In Kareem's first season in LA, the Lakers were atrocious and went 40-42. Kareem had a 17 Win Share season, but nobody else on the team had more than 5 WS. The next season Kareem had an 18 WS season, and dragged that same sorry-ass squad to the WCF, where they were beaten by an absolutely fantastic Portland Trailblazers team that went on to win the title. The next season the Kareem missed 20 games due to injury, but still dragged them to a 45-37 record on a 12 WS season (nobody else had more than 4) and lost to Seattle in the first round; Seattle would lose the Finals to Washington in 7 games, and despite those series having a reputation for crowning weak champions, Seattle had two HoF players (DJ and Jack Sikma) and five players in total who garnered more than 5 WS in the regular season. The next season the Lakers were better after adding Jamaal Wilkes and Adrian Dantley, but they did lose in the second round to Seattle (the eventual champions).

Each season in LA, with the possible exception of the final season before Magic arrived, it is pretty obvious that Kareem dragged those teams as far as they were capable of going, and they often lost to either the eventual champion or conference champion.

You can't with a straight face argue that Kareem is lesser than Magic, because Kareem didn't win his second ring until he was 32 and Magic won two rings right away. Magic wouldn't have sniffed either ring if he wasn't playing with Kareem.
 

Sam Ray Not

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
8,848
NYC
A lot of this was due to the loosening of travel/palming rules in the late 80s. The stuff that Kyrie and Curry and even a back-of-the-bench PG can do now...you simply can't do that if you're not allowed to effectively palm the ball, hang it in the air, wrap it around your back with your hand, etc. It's actually pretty analogous to saying that West would have been a killer 3-point shooter: his dribbling would have been way more effective under the new rules. (This is not intended as a criticism of the loosening of traveling/palming restrictions. I prefer the current product.)
Great point about palming — Steph, Nash, Kyrie, CP3, Harden et al. would almost certainly be getting whistled constantly by 1960s refs on their various hezzies, shamgodds, eurosteps, etc. Still: carries and travels aside, most ballhandlers back then were much more reliant on their dominant hand. In tennis terms, the old guys always look like they're "running around their backhand" (like most of us playground hoopers or tennis players). The stars of today are much more ambidextrous, with more accurate jumpers and a wider array of moves and finishes, even discounting the ones involving obvious carrying.

Put another way: I'd bet a lot that peak Steph, Nash, Kyrie, CP3, Harden et al. would roast peak Jerry West in a time-machine game of one-on-one, even with 1960s refs and no three-point line. But again, that's not really the spirit of this kind of ranking.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,997
Great point about palming — Steph, Nash, Kyrie, CP3, Harden et al. would almost certainly be getting whistled constantly by 1960s refs on their various hezzies, shamgodds, eurosteps, etc. Still: carries and travels aside, most ballhandlers back then were much more reliant on their dominant hand. In tennis terms, the old guys always look like they're "running around their backhand" (like most of us playground hoopers or tennis players). The stars of today are much more ambidextrous, with more accurate jumpers and a wider array of moves and finishes, even discounting the ones involving obvious carrying.

Put another way: I'd bet a lot that peak Steph, Nash, Kyrie, CP3, Harden et al. would roast peak Jerry West in a time-machine game of one-on-one, even with 1960s refs and no three-point line. But again, that's not really the spirit of this kind of ranking.
Yeah, this is true, in the same way that it's true that if you dropped 1985 Larry Bird onto the 2019 Celtics and told him to start launching threes, it probably wouldn't go great at first.

The flip-side is that if you somehow teleported Steph Curry to the 1960s, he wouldn't have the same dribble moves, even without palming, and would likely depend a lot on his dominant hand. Proof-of-concept/moves to copy matter a lot. There's a reason Kyrie uses the word "craft" constantly as a PG.

As you said, that really isn't in the spirit of the ranking, but it is interesting to note the ways that both rule changes and models for moves have changed the game drastically for smalls.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,403
around the way
I really disagree with this. The case for Kareem as the true GOAT is very straightforward and logical:

- 6x Titles
- 2x Finals MVP
- 6x MVP
- 15x All-NBA (10x First Team)
- 11x All-Defense
- All-time leading scorer
- 3rd all-time in rebounds
- Best college player ever

It has already been discussed that during the gap in titles for Kareem, he had very little help. During that 8 year stretch, Kareem averaged 29-13-4.5 with 3.5 bpg. In the playoffs he averaged 29-16. I guess he should have averaged 35-20, right? Maybe then he wouldn't have had such a big gap in titles? We never hold it against LeBron or Jordan for not winning titles over the early stretches of their career, we accept that is was mainly due to their lack of support, how come Kareem doesn't get that same benefit of the doubt?

The 1970s lacked a truly dominant team like some other decades, but there were plenty of excellent teams to contend with. In Kareem's first season in LA, the Lakers were atrocious and went 40-42. Kareem had a 17 Win Share season, but nobody else on the team had more than 5 WS. The next season Kareem had an 18 WS season, and dragged that same sorry-ass squad to the WCF, where they were beaten by an absolutely fantastic Portland Trailblazers team that went on to win the title. The next season the Kareem missed 20 games due to injury, but still dragged them to a 45-37 record on a 12 WS season (nobody else had more than 4) and lost to Seattle in the first round; Seattle would lose the Finals to Washington in 7 games, and despite those series having a reputation for crowning weak champions, Seattle had two HoF players (DJ and Jack Sikma) and five players in total who garnered more than 5 WS in the regular season. The next season the Lakers were better after adding Jamaal Wilkes and Adrian Dantley, but they did lose in the second round to Seattle (the eventual champions).

Each season in LA, with the possible exception of the final season before Magic arrived, it is pretty obvious that Kareem dragged those teams as far as they were capable of going, and they often lost to either the eventual champion or conference champion.

You can't with a straight face argue that Kareem is lesser than Magic, because Kareem didn't win his second ring until he was 32 and Magic won two rings right away. Magic wouldn't have sniffed either ring if he wasn't playing with Kareem.
How many years was Jordan unable to make the playoffs? Lebron, outside of his age 19/20 years? Bird, Magic?

Kareem had a couple of years in the 1970s where he couldn't even drag a team to the playoffs in his prime, nevermind the finals.

If you are the Greatest basketball player Of All Time, you can drag 4 plumbers to the playoffs in the 1970s. Bird could have. Same with Magic, Lebron, or Jordan. That is why those guys all belong above him.

Kareem was super productive and unique. It just didnt translate to a lot of professional winning until he met Magic.
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
24,651
where I was last at
Re 70s Its a shame for lots of reasons, that Bad Wheels Walton broke down, and had he played a fuller career he may have become Kareem's Russell. We got cheated for the most part . With a quick check it looks like Walton was 6-3 in the post-season against KAJ, (4-0 in '77, 2-3 in '87) I couldn't quickly find/didn't feel like hand counting regular season H2H.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,096
I get arguments against Kareem being the absolute GOAT. Jordan, and then LeBron deserve to headline that discussion. However, it's also absurd to claim that Kareem is ranked about 10 spots too high:

The Bucks went from 27-55 to 56-26 upon Kareem's arrival.

The 1974-75 Bucks went 35-30 (0.538) with Kareem, 3-14 (0.176) without. The 1975-76 Lakers had 10 more wins than they had the prior season, when they finished last in the West. The 1977-78 Lakers went 37-25 (0.597) with Kareem, 8-12 (0.400) without.

Making the playoffs in the mid-1970's NBA may not have been quite as easy as it seemed. 10 teams out of 18 qualified. The 1976 Lakers had a better record than either of the two playoff teams from the Midwest Division (Bucks, Pistons). The other team from the Pacific Division that missed the playoffs also had a dominant center in Bill Walton. That was the same season that the 42-40 Suns went to the NBA Finals.

The following season saw an influx of ABA talent into the league as a result of the merger. The Rockets added Moses Malone (a true Kareem nemesis). The Sixers added Dr. J. The West welcomed a Nuggets team that would start 3 Hall of Fame players. Walton would take a leap forward with the Blazers. The only change with the Lakers was the addition of Jerry West as head coach, and they finished with the best record in the West.

Re 70s Its a shame for lots of reasons, that Bad Wheels Walton broke down, and had he played a fuller career he may have become Kareem's Russell. We got cheated for the most part . With a quick check it looks like Walton was 6-3 in the post-season against KAJ, (4-0 in '77, 2-3 in '87) I couldn't quickly find/didn't feel like hand counting regular season H2H.
https://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&player_id1_hint=Kareem+Abdul-Jabbar&player_id1_select=Kareem+Abdul-Jabbar&player_id1=abdulka01&idx=players&player_id2_hint=Bill+Walton&player_id2_select=Bill+Walton&player_id2=waltobi01&idx=players
Walton was 10-16 against Kareem in the regular season, 6-3 in the playoffs. Just should note that Walton was a ghost of himself in those 1987 Finals, having barely played all season due to his recurring foot injuries.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
22,669
Re 70s Its a shame for lots of reasons, that Bad Wheels Walton broke down, and had he played a fuller career he may have become Kareem's Russell. We got cheated for the most part . With a quick check it looks like Walton was 6-3 in the post-season against KAJ, (4-0 in '77, 2-3 in '87) I couldn't quickly find/didn't feel like hand counting regular season H2H.
Everything up to his injuries indicated that Walton was going to be one of the absolute very players in history.
 

Sam Ray Not

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
8,848
NYC
With apologies for Bill Simmons talk, It’s hard to own a decade.

1960s: Russell + Wilt
1970s: Kareem
1980s: Magic + Bird
1990s: Jordan
2000s: Shaq + Duncan
2010s: LeBron + Steph

Not weighing in on the Kareem ranking per se, but I think you can say he’s the only guy other than Jordan who has unequivocally ruled a decade. Even the ‘90s kind of had a #1B in Hakeem (or Pippen). Who’s the 1970s #1B? I guess Dr. J?

Edit: if you’re not a Warriors homer, you can say LeBron unequivocally ruled the 2010s (overall), which would make Kareem’s only company MJ and LeBron.
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
24,651
where I was last at
Its tough to rule a decade without more than one title.

Cowens, with two titles (he should have had three-Havlicek got mugged by the Knicks in '73) and half-a-foot smaller than KAJ, played KAJ tough. Their '74 7-gamer was great stuff.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,096
The 1970's was a strange decade for the NBA. 8 different teams won league titles, and 10 teams made appearances in the Finals. Only 2 teams, the Knicks and Celtics, won more than one title. And, of course, the Finals games were either on tape delay or blacked out completely by the end of the era. The contrast with the NFL and MLB was striking.

There were few superstars from the late 1970's that were household names: Elvin Hayes was in his mid-30's; Bill Walton and Rudy Tomjanovich were hurt; Bill Lanier was toiling for some terrible Pistons teams; Jack Sikma, Gus Williams, and Wes Unseld were good-to-great players in their day, but not generational ones. Frazier, Barry, Havlicek, Cowens, West, Robertson, Bill Bradley, and JoJo White were either long retired or well on their way to retirement. And the league seemed reluctant to market some of the ABA talent that came on board after the merger such as Artis Gilmore, Moses Malone, George Gervin and Dan Issel. Dr J was the exception, but he was stuck on a dysfunctional 76'ers team with George McGinnis and World B Free that consistently underachieved in the playoffs. And Celtics fans were forced to watch Curtis Rowe and Sidney Wicks.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
22,669
The 1970's was a strange decade for the NBA. 8 different teams won league titles, and 10 teams made appearances in the Finals. Only 2 teams, the Knicks and Celtics, won more than one title. And, of course, the Finals games were either on tape delay or blacked out completely by the end of the era. The contrast with the NFL and MLB was striking.

There were few superstars from the late 1970's that were household names: Elvin Hayes was in his mid-30's; Bill Walton and Rudy Tomjanovich were hurt; Bill Lanier was toiling for some terrible Pistons teams; Jack Sikma, Gus Williams, and Wes Unseld were good-to-great players in their day, but not generational ones. Frazier, Barry, Havlicek, Cowens, West, Robertson, Bill Bradley, and JoJo White were either long retired or well on their way to retirement. And the league seemed reluctant to market some of the ABA talent that came on board after the merger such as Artis Gilmore, Moses Malone, George Gervin and Dan Issel. Dr J was the exception, but he was stuck on a dysfunctional 76'ers team with George McGinnis and World B Free that consistently underachieved in the playoffs. And Celtics fans were forced to watch Curtis Rowe and Sidney Wicks.
The rise of ABA hurt the NBA for a few reasons. By taking underclassmen and even high school players in the draft, the ABA got a jump start on the next wave of talent in basketball, which is why many of the key non-Kareem names in the first half of the 1970s were guys on the tail end of their career. The ABA also allowed a more entertaining, free style of play that contrasted well when compared to the NBA, which was focused more on fundamentals and teamwork. In the 1960s, NBA guys in general didn't like dunking, it was viewed as a brutish, unskilled play. The ABA never quite got where it could have gone because too many of the owners were in over their head and the league's administration was terrible, but the teams that were well-run (Denver, San Antonio, Indiana) were clearly onto something and it was reflected in the success of their teams when they merged with the NBA.

Also everyone was doing mountains of coke.
 

snowmanny

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
15,667
The 1972 Bucks were not going to stop the Lakers juggernaut of that same season, Kareem or no Kareem.
Small point:

I actually thought the Bucks were the better team in that series and that they would win that matchup say 6 of 10 times.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
22,669
Small point:

I actually thought the Bucks were the better team in that series and that they would win that matchup say 6 of 10 times.
The early 70s Bucks were an awesome team, before Oscar got old. For Kareem's first five seasons, Milwaukee won 56, 66, 63, 60 and 59 games. The league was kind of diluted due to expansion teams (of which the Bucks were one of, one season before Kareem came along) which allowed for certain teams to rack up big winning totals.
 

djbayko

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
25,894
Los Angeles, CA
With apologies for Bill Simmons talk, It’s hard to own a decade.

1960s: Russell + Wilt
1970s: Kareem
1980s: Magic + Bird
1990s: Jordan
2000s: Shaq + Duncan
2010s: LeBron + Steph

Not weighing in on the Kareem ranking per se, but I think you can say he’s the only guy other than Jordan who has unequivocally ruled a decade. Even the ‘90s kind of had a #1B in Hakeem (or Pippen). Who’s the 1970s #1B? I guess Dr. J?

Edit: if you’re not a Warriors homer, you can say LeBron unequivocally ruled the 2010s (overall), which would make Kareem’s only company MJ and LeBron.
Deciding which players/teams were best in each decade in different sports can be a fun exercise, but the endpoints are kind of arbitrary. I often wonder what lists such as this would look like if our calendar makers had decided Jesus was born 5 years later. Or 7 years earlier. You get the idea.
 

Sam Ray Not

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
8,848
NYC
Deciding which players/teams were best in each decade in different sports can be a fun exercise, but the endpoints are kind of arbitrary. I often wonder what lists such as this would look like if our calendar makers had decided Jesus was born 5 years later. Or 7 years earlier. You get the idea.
For sure — that’s kinda why I added the note about Bill Simmons (who can’t seem to go three minutes with uttering the word “decade”).

At the same time, I think it’s interesting how neatly the 10 players on that list (who also happen to be the top 10 guys on the B-R list that kicked off this thread) organize into decades. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think there are any of them for whom mid-decade to mid-decade endpoints would cover their best years better than just normal decades.

You could maybe argue Kareem 1975-1984 since it gets him more rings, but he was obviously a much more dominant player from 1970-1974 than from 1980-1984 (when he was probably not a top 5 NBA player). Plus the 1970-1971 and 1971-72 Bucks were statistically the #1 and #5 best teams in NBA history (https://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/tiny.fcgi?id=V4hH2), miles ahead of any of the Magic/Kareem Lakers teams.

Now if we can pick any ten-year period, yeah, you could definitely futz with the endpoints a bit. (Give me 1989-1998 Jordan, 2009-2018 LeBron, etc.)
 
Last edited:

jose melendez

Earl of Acie
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 23, 2003
30,971
Geneva, Switzerland
I've been really glad to see the defense of the awesomeness of Bill Russell. I never saw him play--way too young--but the guy is criminally underrated.

Bill Russell basically won everything he ever competed for at every level. He won two NCAA championships, and 11 NBA championships in 13 seasons. In one of the two seasons he didn't win he was hurt.

No one does that. No one. Over the course of a period of 15 years, across college and the pros, he was the common denomonater for who won the title.
 

bakahump

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 8, 2001
7,520
Maine
Wasnt he a track star too? (Hurdles?)

Edit: High Jump. He tied the eventual Gold Medal Winner in some meets in college with 6'9" (Dumas)
 

PedrosRedGlove

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 5, 2005
670
Good excuse to post this clip, criminally underrated is right. Russell and Wilt get knocked for dominating a league in its infancy, but their respective combinations of size and athleticism (Wilt was also an elite track & field athlete in his youth) still might be unmatched.

View: https://youtu.be/JWelUNrJUMM
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
13,487
Santa Monica, CA
Bill Russell is underrated? I almost always see him listed in the top 3 players of all time, certainly the top 5.

At that point we're all splitting hairs. Knowledgeable people agree that he was awesome.

The guys I see as underrated out of the old school are Pettit and Oscar.
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
13,487
Santa Monica, CA
With apologies for Bill Simmons talk, It’s hard to own a decade.

1960s: Russell + Wilt
1970s: Kareem
1980s: Magic + Bird
1990s: Jordan
2000s: Shaq + Duncan
2010s: LeBron + Steph

Not weighing in on the Kareem ranking per se, but I think you can say he’s the only guy other than Jordan who has unequivocally ruled a decade. Even the ‘90s kind of had a #1B in Hakeem (or Pippen). Who’s the 1970s #1B? I guess Dr. J?

Edit: if you’re not a Warriors homer, you can say LeBron unequivocally ruled the 2010s (overall), which would make Kareem’s only company MJ and LeBron.
The only reason most of these guys don't "own a decade" is because they split their career across two decades. Seems arbitrary to me.

If Shaq entered the league in 1997 instead of 1992, he's on this list. Same if Lebron entered in 2007 instead of 2003.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,997
Good excuse to post this clip, criminally underrated is right. Russell and Wilt get knocked for dominating a league in its infancy, but their respective combinations of size and athleticism (Wilt was also an elite track & field athlete in his youth) still might be unmatched.

View: https://youtu.be/JWelUNrJUMM
That's completely ridiculous, thanks for that. While overall skills have improved a lot (shooting, dribbling), Russell and Wilt were all-time athletic greats, no adjustments for time period needed.
 

reggiecleveland

sublime
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2004
27,957
Saskatoon Canada
Kareem, Shaq too high, Hakeem too low.

Anyone picking Wilt over Russell didn't see them both play. I have talked to lots of old timers, especially coaches and Russ is a guy they talk about when it come to being a winner. Wilt is a guy they talk about as an underachiever. These older guys usually talk about Jordan, Bird, Russell, Magic in will to win. Shaq, Kareem, Wilt are guys they drop below their talent as being questionable as winners for big parts of their careers. Shaq wasn't always in shape or coachable, Kareem sulked away entire seasons, as did Wilt. Kobe is a guy with a similar drive to the greats, but consensus is his ego often got in the way of being a team mate. Hubie Brown said at a coaching conference on difference between Jordan and Kobe, "Both like many great scorers began their careers as selfish pricks, then became all time great winners, but Kobe also ended as a selfish prick."

Many guys, and I am one think Hakeem at his peak is right at the top with anybody. It took him longer to get to that peak, so as a total career he is lower, but one series, one guy at his peak? I could live with him.
 

PedrosRedGlove

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 5, 2005
670
Bill Russell is underrated? I almost always see him listed in the top 3 players of all time, certainly the top 5.

At that point we're all splitting hairs. Knowledgeable people agree that he was awesome.

The guys I see as underrated out of the old school are Pettit and Oscar.
The list being discussed places him #8, which I feel is where a lot of lists end up slotting him. It is entirely due to the era he played in though, I feel like the consensus Top 5 on most of these lists are the post-merger superstars: Kareem, Magic, Larry, MJ, and LeBron, while Russell and Wilt get sprinkled amongst Kobe, Duncan, Hakeem, the 2nd tier of GOATs if you will.

I do agree about Pettit and O, basically everyone from the '70s EXCEPT Kareem and maybe Dr. J is underrated to a degree.
 

Montana Fan

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 18, 2000
8,880
Twin Bridges, Mt.
Kareem, Shaq too high, Hakeem too low.

Anyone picking Wilt over Russell didn't see them both play. I have talked to lots of old timers, especially coaches and Russ is a guy they talk about when it come to being a winner. Wilt is a guy they talk about as an underachiever. These older guys usually talk about Jordan, Bird, Russell, Magic in will to win. Shaq, Kareem, Wilt are guys they drop below their talent as being questionable as winners for big parts of their careers. Shaq wasn't always in shape or coachable, Kareem sulked away entire seasons, as did Wilt. Kobe is a guy with a similar drive to the greats, but consensus is his ego often got in the way of being a team mate. Hubie Brown said at a coaching conference on difference between Jordan and Kobe, "Both like many great scorers began their careers as selfish pricks, then became all time great winners, but Kobe also ended as a selfish prick."

Many guys, and I am one think Hakeem at his peak is right at the top with anybody. It took him longer to get to that peak, so as a total career he is lower, but one series, one guy at his peak? I could live with him.
Do you remember him his freshman year at Houston? Never saw a player as raw as he was. Loved watching him develop over his career.
 

reggiecleveland

sublime
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2004
27,957
Saskatoon Canada
Pretty amazing he became such a skilled guy in the NBA.

Bonus points for that he pranked the press and NCAA coaches that he had 4 brothers bigger than him, and a little brother that was "only 6-10" and they were so much more athletic than he was he had to play goalie on the soccer team.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
22,669
Some guys that deserve more love and are certainly in the top 15 discussion:

- Elgin Baylor revolutionized the game and was the prototype for every other athletic wing player that attacked the basket. He averaged 13.5 rpg for his career as a 6'5" forward, including averaging 20 rpg in 1960-61. He is easily one of the most explosive scorers in league history, averaging over 34 ppg three times, including 38 ppg in 1962, the season he famously only played 48 games in because he was on military duty and could only make the games on the weekends. He once scored 71 points in 1960, and scored 60+ points on four other occasions, including 61 in Game 5 of the 1962 Finals. He blew out his knee in the 1965 playoffs, and by all accounts he was never the same player after that, but still managed to average 24-11 in the five seasons following it.

- John Havlicek was the gold standard for consistency and longevity before Kareem came along, and when he retired he ranked in the Top 5 of a bunch of different categories. Havlicek won 8 rings, and unlike most of the other Celtics who thrived during the Russell-era, Havlicek hung on to lead his team to two more titles after Russell retired. He was the prototypical do-it-all forward, averaging 21-6-5 for his career and making 8 All-Defense teams. His 1970-71 season was a masterpiece, averaging 29-9-7.5 while playing 45 minutes a game and making All-Defense. That is about as good of a regular season as LeBron has ever had. He made some of the clutchest plays in NBA history, including the running banker in the 76 Finals in double OT which would have won the game if not for Gar Heard's miracle turnaround.

- Moses Malone has a very strong resume; 3x MVP, 8x All-NBA (during a loaded era for Centers), 1983 Finals MVP, 9th All-Time in scoring, 2nd all-time in free throws, 5th all-time in rebounds (3rd if you count his ABA total), 1st in offensive rebounds (albeit, they didn't keep track of offensive boards in the Wilt/Russell era), you could make a great arguement he is the fourth best center of all-time behind Russell, Wilt and Kareem.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,096
Malone (23), Baylor (24), and Havlicek (26) were all ranked similarly (Pippen was 25). The reality is that the top 15 slots are all pretty crowded, so I can accept those rankings. Personally, I would put all 3 of them above Karl Malone (20) and Dwayne Wade (21), but that's just me.
 

reggiecleveland

sublime
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2004
27,957
Saskatoon Canada
Moses was Holyfield to Kareem's Tyson. He just owned Kareem. At his peak he was so much stronger, quicker off his feat, etc Kareem had no answer.

Karl Malone was really f--ing good. He is hurt by the fact they could't get a title, but a bit of courageous reffing and the win at least one against the Bulls. He ran the floor as well as any big, and did it for years.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2uWPKNUwEtw