The 50 Greatest 20 years on. Who's in? Who's out?

[TyroneVickery29]

Did you read my original post? I clearly state what he is a lock with Kobe, Duncan and LeBron from the past 20 year.

Ahhhh, apologies

 

[jod23]

Ahhhh, apologies

Dirk is legit!

 

[fidstar]

I think where Stockton falls down is scoring. Scoring is a huge part of the game, you have to score points to win. In a tight game you wouldnt put the ball in Stockton's hand to take the game winning shot. Hell he couldnt really create his own shot. Sure the ball would be in his hands because he is a great passer but in the end, he wouldnt be the one taking the shot.

Stockton to me was a "I want to pass first player", not a "I can't shoot so I pass player". He never shot under 47%. He could score, he just thought it was more efficient being a passer first.

And I'm surprised by your comment about him not being the finisher. Utah gave him the ball in crunch time most of the time and let him make the decision on whether to shoot or pass. He has many clutch shots to his resume, none bigger than the game winner in the conference finals against Houston to get them to the finals. He also had two other game winners in the Playoffs (Game 1 1995 Western Conference First Round and Game 4 1999 Western Conference First Round). Game 4 of the 97 finals Stockton takes over the last few minutes. Down by 5 with 2 minutes to play he scores 4 straight points before throwing one of the best passes you'll ever see to Malone to set up the win.

He was also given the last shot in Game 6 of the finals against the Bulls in 97 (didn't hit it).

I'd put the ball in his hand at the end of the game.

 

[jod23]

Stockton to me was a "I want to pass first player", not a "I can't shoot so I pass player". He never shot under 47%. He could score, he just thought it was more efficient being a passer first.

And I'm surprised by your comment about him not being the finisher. Utah gave him the ball in crunch time most of the time and let him make the decision on whether to shoot or pass. He has many clutch shots to his resume, none bigger than the game winner in the conference finals against Houston to get them to the finals. He also had two other game winners in the Playoffs (Game 1 1995 Western Conference First Round and Game 4 1999 Western Conference First Round). Game 4 of the 97 finals Stockton takes over the last few minutes. Down by 5 with 2 minutes to play he scores 4 straight points before throwing one of the best passes you'll ever see to Malone to set up the win.

He was also given the last shot in Game 6 of the finals against the Bulls in 97 (didn't hit it).

I'd put the ball in his hand at the end of the game.

But his team has to be in a position to win a game late. Like if you are down 12 with 5 mins to go, you dont expect Stockton to pour in 14 unanswered points to drag your team back into it.

Stockton was never afraid of the big shot and was somewhat clutch. But his scoring and ability to score still let's him down in a top 50 discussion.

 

[Son of Skeletor]

I think where Stockton falls down is scoring. Scoring is a huge part of the game, you have to score points to win.

Nash had a career scoring average of 14, Stockton 13. Nash's career TS% is 60.5%, Stockton's 60.8%, both elite.

What did Bill Russell average again?

In a tight game you wouldnt put the ball in Stockton's hand to take the game winning shot. Hell he couldnt really create his own shot. Sure the ball would be in his hands because he is a great passer but in the end, he wouldnt be the one taking the shot.

Really?

Stockton had his chances though, he got to play with Karl Malone. The one thing I always felt sorry for when it came to Patrick Ewing, is that over his entire career, they never put found or traded for or drafted a Robin for Ewing's Batman.

Ewing had his chances too - Houston didn't have a second superstar in '94, didn't stop Hakeem.

As for Dick Bavetta? What's that got to do with anything. The Eisley three happens in like the first quarter. The Ron Harper call happens with still 4 minutes to go in the game. Which is only Game 6. So even if Utah somehow win, they still have to win Game 7. Clutching at straws for Stockton getting a ring.

That's a five point turnaround in a one point game. Utah would have had a home Game 7 and Pippen could barely walk. They'd have been overwhelming favourites. If you're going to make championships won a factor in the discussion, then it's churlish to dismiss how close Utah came.

Allen is an interesting one. All time leader in 3pt made. Very good scorer, decent per game averages and won two championships.

Only as the third best player in 2008 and about the fifth best player in 2013. I only mention this because you've shifted the goal-posts here:

As for Alonzo Mourning. Great player, but I think he falls short of the top 50 talks. He just wasnt a winner. Never got out of the second round IIRC in his first stint before the kidney problems. Once he came back, he was just a role player for the Heat and won a championship but when he was the main man, his teams always fell way short.

You recall incorrectly, the Heat did make it the conference finals in 1997. Do you know how many times Hakeem made it to the conference finals in his first eight seasons? Once (1986). Do you know how many times David Robinson did it in his first eight seasons? Once (1995). Do you know how many times Patrick Ewing made it to the conference finals in his first eight seasons? Once (1993). Do you remember Shaq's playoff reputation before 2000? His teams were SWEPT five times in six years and lost 4-1 in '98. Would you call any of those guys 'non-winners' based on that?

That's the difference between Zo and a player like Ewing. Ewing was a winner, despite never getting a ring, he never had support and always dragged his team deep into the playoffs. Forever coming up short against Jordan and when Jordan retired, he ran into Olajuwon with a far better support cast than his own team.

Patently incorrect. Olajuwon's supporting cast in '94 (Thorpe, Smith, Horry, Cassell) was not better than Ewing's (Oakley, Harper, Starks, Mason). The Knicks made it to the second round twice, got knocked out in the first round twice, and twice didn't qualify for the playoffs in Ewing's first six years. Not quite sure how that makes Ewing a 'winner' and Mourning 'not a winner', but anyway...

Also guys like Cowens, Reed and Unseld may have worse PER but they won. They not only won championships but they won MVP's and Finals MVP's. They are huge. It means they were the best in the biggest and most important games. Mourning was never that guy.

Yeah, and they also happened to play with multiple Hall of Famers each (Frazier, Monroe, DeBusschere, Havlicek, White, Hayes, Dandridge), which kinda helps.

How many true stars did 'Zo play with? One - Hardaway, and he was declining rapidly when Zo was in his prime years (99-00). I still don't understand the compulsion to argue that Grant Hill was clearly on his way to the top 50, based on... ? (he looked good and his career got cut short?) but Zo's not in the conversation because 'he's not a winner'. Your goal posts continually shift based on perception, but that perception doesn't correlate with the facts.

 

[fidstar]

Son of Skeletor I would have called pre-injury Larry Johnson a star.

I would also say peak Hill > peak Zo and projection wise Hill was going to finish higher on the greatness list pre injuries than Zo

Not taking anything away from Zo, as I loved the guy and was always a Zo before Shaq guy.

 

[fidstar]

But his team has to be in a position to win a game late. Like if you are down 12 with 5 mins to go, you dont expect Stockton to pour in 14 unanswered points to drag your team back into it.

Stockton was never afraid of the big shot and was somewhat clutch. But his scoring and ability to score still let's him down in a top 50 discussion.

Stockton is still going to make good decisions down the stretch. Scoring isn't the only thing you can do on a court to influence the outcome. A regular in the GOAT list Russel is a perfect example.

 

[jod23]

Stockton is still going to make good decisions down the stretch. Scoring isn't the only thing you can do on a court to influence the outcome. A regular in the GOAT list Russel is a perfect example.

Of course he is. Decision making wise, he was elite. Im not saying Stockton wouldnt make the top 50. Im just saying IMO he isnt a lock and if we were re-doing a top 50 today, he might be one that may fall out of it.

I mean just the four guys I mentioned earlier would make the top 50 before Stockton. So where is Stockton on the list. If he was say ranked 47th of the top 50. He would slide out because Kobe, Duncan, Dirk and LeBron are coming in.

I think you have to have Wade in there too. So that's another spot.

This isnt a personal attack on Stockton or saying he is s**t. His spot was well deserved in 1996. But im just not sure he remains top 50 is all im arguing.

 

[Son of Skeletor]

Son of Skeletor I would have called pre-injury Larry Johnson a star.

He was a star, but he did his back at the end of 'Zo's rookie season, was never the same player again. That one prime year together was the year they gave the Knicks a good fight after this happened in the first round #notawinner

I would also say peak Hill > peak Zo and projection wise Hill was going to finish higher on the greatness list pre injuries than Zo

Not taking anything away from Zo, as I loved the guy and was always a Zo before Shaq guy.

That's certainly a justifiable argument, although I think people kinda forget that when Zo was struck down he was a top five player in the league.

Regardless, you're not going to hear a bad word from me about Grant Hill.

 

[jod23]

Son of Skeletor I would have called pre-injury Larry Johnson a star.

I would also say peak Hill > peak Zo and projection wise Hill was going to finish higher on the greatness list pre injuries than Zo

Not taking anything away from Zo, as I loved the guy and was always a Zo before Shaq guy.

I agree, Hill was tracking through the roof.

He also never had anybody to play with. When he was drafted he joined a Pistons team who's best players were the fading Joe Dumars and Allan Houston in just his second year in the league. In his time in Detroit he would go on to play with guys like Theo Ratliff, Lindsey Hunter, Stacey Augmon, Kenny Smith, Christian Laettner.

Houston would leave via free agency pretty quickly and the best player Hill probably played with was a young Jerry Stackhouse for a couple of years before the ankle gave way.

I think people forget how good Grant Hill was. Like he seems genuinely forgotten. He was tracking to be possibly top 10-20 of all time. Maybe even more if he could find better teammates and win some championships. Just look at some of the following.

• Hill averaged 19.9 points, 6.4 rebounds, 5.0 assists and 1.77 steals per game in his rookie season, sharing ROTY with Jason Kidd.
  
• Hill made history by being the first rookie to lead All Star voting. In addition, he became the first rookie in any of the four major professional sports leagues to lead all-star fan voting.
• In his second season in the league, he led the NBA in triple doubles.
  
• In the 96/97 season, Hill averaged 21.4 points, 9.0 rebounds, 7.3 assists and 1.8 steals per game. He became the first player since Larry Bird in 1989/90 to average 20 points, 9 rebounds and 7 assists in a season, an accomplishment that has not been duplicated since.
  
• In just his third season in the league, the 96/97 campaign, he finished 3rd in MVP voting behind just Karl Malone and Michael Jordan
• In the lockout shortened season of 1999, as he led his team in points, rebounds and assists for the third time, Hill joined Wilt Chamberlain and Elgin Baylor as the only players in NBA history to lead their teams in scoring, rebounding and assists more than once. Hill and Chamberlain are the only two players in league history to lead their teams in points, rebounds and assists per game three times.
• After the first six seasons of his career, before his ankle injury, Hill had a total of 9,393 points, 3,417 rebounds and 2,720 assists. Oscar Robertson, Bird, and LeBron James are the only three players in league history to eclipse these numbers after their first six seasons.

The guy was crazy good. Had no support in Detroit so left for Orlando, but that was right about the time when the ankle hit. The ankle started in the playoffs his final year at Detroit. We all know what happened after. He is the ultimate what if in the NBA IMO. More than Penny or Zo for sure.

You know you are good when you are mentioned in stat lines and records with Wilt, Baylor, Bird, LeBron, Jordan, Oscar etc...

 

[fidstar]

Of course he is. Decision making wise, he was elite. Im not saying Stockton wouldnt make the top 50. Im just saying IMO he isnt a lock and if we were re-doing a top 50 today, he might be one that may fall out of it.

I mean just the four guys I mentioned earlier would make the top 50 before Stockton. So where is Stockton on the list. If he was say ranked 47th of the top 50. He would slide out because Kobe, Duncan, Dirk and LeBron are coming in.

I think you have to have Wade in there too. So that's another spot.

This isnt a personal attack on Stockton or saying he is s**t. His spot was well deserved in 1996. But im just not sure he remains top 50 is all im arguing.

Stockton is, I believe, the second best Point Guard of all time (though I have no issue with people that say he isn't). On my list he's at least Top 30, most likely Top 20, so your talk about him being pushed out by someone else isn't even in my thoughts.

 

[fidstar]

I agree, Hill was tracking through the roof.

He also never had anybody to play with. When he was drafted he joined a Pistons team who's best players were the fading Joe Dumars and Allan Houston in just his second year in the league. In his time in Detroit he would go on to play with guys like Theo Ratliff, Lindsey Hunter, Stacey Augmon, Kenny Smith, Christian Laettner.

Houston would leave via free agency pretty quickly and the best player Hill probably played with was a young Jerry Stackhouse for a couple of years before the ankle gave way.

I think people forget how good Grant Hill was. Like he seems genuinely forgotten. He was tracking to be possibly top 10-20 of all time. Maybe even more if he could find better teammates and win some championships. Just look at some of the following.

• Hill averaged 19.9 points, 6.4 rebounds, 5.0 assists and 1.77 steals per game in his rookie season, sharing ROTY with Jason Kidd.
  
• Hill made history by being the first rookie to lead All Star voting. In addition, he became the first rookie in any of the four major professional sports leagues to lead all-star fan voting.
• In his second season in the league, he led the NBA in triple doubles.
  
• In the 96/97 season, Hill averaged 21.4 points, 9.0 rebounds, 7.3 assists and 1.8 steals per game. He became the first player since Larry Bird in 1989/90 to average 20 points, 9 rebounds and 7 assists in a season, an accomplishment that has not been duplicated since.
  
• In just his third season in the league, the 96/97 campaign, he finished 3rd in MVP voting behind just Karl Malone and Michael Jordan
• In the lockout shortened season of 1999, as he led his team in points, rebounds and assists for the third time, Hill joined Wilt Chamberlain and Elgin Baylor as the only players in NBA history to lead their teams in scoring, rebounding and assists more than once. Hill and Chamberlain are the only two players in league history to lead their teams in points, rebounds and assists per game three times.
• After the first six seasons of his career, before his ankle injury, Hill had a total of 9,393 points, 3,417 rebounds and 2,720 assists. Oscar Robertson, Bird, and LeBron James are the only three players in league history to eclipse these numbers after their first six seasons.

The guy was crazy good. Had no support in Detroit so left for Orlando, but that was right about the time when the ankle hit. The ankle started in the playoffs his final year at Detroit. We all know what happened after. He is the ultimate what if in the NBA IMO. More than Penny or Zo for sure.

You know you are good when you are mentioned in stat lines and records with Wilt, Baylor, Bird, LeBron, Jordan, Oscar etc...

Agree with everything but the all-star voting thing. That's pretty irrelevant in regards to how good he is, otherwise we should be talking about Vince Carter more.

 

[jod23]

Nash had a career scoring average of 14, Stockton 13. Nash's career TS% is 60.5%, Stockton's 60.8%, both elite.

What did Bill Russell average again?



Really?

Again im not arguing that Nash should be in before Stockton. Personally I'd take Stockton. Nash was just a name I threw out there for discussion, as I would think every player to have won more than one MVP would be in the top 50. In fact ill quickly check that.

The only blokes to win more than one MVP in the history of the NBA are KAJ, Jordan, Russell, Wilt, LeBron, Bird, Magic, Dr.J, Moses Malone, Tim Duncan, Bob Pettit, Karl Malone and .. Steve Nash.

All the players named before Steve Nash made the top 50 of all time except of course Duncan as it was pre Duncan and pre Nash.

As for those YouTube video's. Tons of player have hit game winners in the NBA. Stockton was ice cold, never afraid of the big shot. The first video though there is no pressure on him as it's a tied game. Utah wont lose if he misses, plus it's a defensive breakdown. Not sure the play is made for him. Second one, it's a pick n roll, no doubt designed to get Malone the final shot. The defence over plays Karl Malone and Stockton is left wide open to win it.

When I say you dont want the ball in his hands I meant like being able to create his own shot. He wasnt a scorer who could do this. Good shooter for sure, not afraid of the big shot. Sure. But there would be a whole host of names in the history of the game, you would look to take a game winner before Stockton.

Ewing had his chances too - Houston didn't have a second superstar in '94, didn't stop Hakeem.

That was a bizarre year where both teams made it to the Finals without a bonafide second star. You can argue who had the better supporting but you cant argue that Olajuwon was better than Ewing. It's what got Houston over the line.

The Knicks led that series 3-2 and Starks had a three in Game 6 at the buzzer. A decent look for the win and the championship. Ewing was so close. Then in Game 7 of that series, Starks shoots 2-18 and 0-11 from deep. He got a lot closer than Mourning ever did.

That's a five point turnaround in a one point game. Utah would have had a home Game 7 and Pippen could barely walk. They'd have been overwhelming favourites. If you're going to make championships won a factor in the discussion, then it's churlish to dismiss how close Utah came.

That's a ridiculous argument. That's the butterfly effect. Utah did get close, but they couldnt win one. No shame in that, so many great players missed out because of MJ.

Only as the third best player in 2008 and about the fifth best player in 2013. I only mention this because you've shifted the goal-posts here:

Again im only mentioning Allen for discussion purposes. He could be there or thereabouts. He'd be a candidate from the past 20 years to maybe have a look at. Again I dont think he makes it. It was just a name I threw out there.

You recall incorrectly, the Heat did make it the conference finals in 1997. Do you know how many times Hakeem made it to the conference finals in his first eight seasons? Once (1986). Do you know how many times David Robinson did it in his first eight seasons? Once (1995). Do you know how many times Patrick Ewing made it to the conference finals in his first eight seasons? Once (1993). Do you remember Shaq's playoff reputation before 2000? His teams were SWEPT five times in six years and lost 4-1 in '98. Would you call any of those guys 'non-winners' based on that?

Well no I wouldnt but Olajuwon, Robinson and Shaq all won title. Ewing got ridiculously close when Jordan was finally out the way. All the other times, he just ran into the GOAT.

Patently incorrect. Olajuwon's supporting cast in '94 (Thorpe, Smith, Horry, Cassell) was not better than Ewing's (Oakley, Harper, Starks, Mason). The Knicks made it to the second round twice, got knocked out in the first round twice, and twice didn't qualify for the playoffs in Ewing's first six years. Not quite sure how that makes Ewing a 'winner' and Mourning 'not a winner', but anyway...



Yeah, and they also happened to play with multiple Hall of Famers each (Frazier, Monroe, DeBusschere, Havlicek, White, Hayes, Dandridge), which kinda helps.

How many true stars did 'Zo play with? One - Hardaway, and he was declining rapidly when Zo was in his prime years (99-00). I still don't understand the compulsion to argue that Grant Hill was clearly on his way to the top 50, based on... ? (he looked good and his career got cut short?) but Zo's not in the conversation because 'he's not a winner'. Your goal posts continually shift based on perception, but that perception doesn't correlate with the facts.

Tim Hardaway was a hell of player. He played with Mashburn too who was a star. I think Hill and Zo are some ways apart. Grant Hill wasnt just tracking for top 50, but like top 15 or so. Alonzo Mourning was a great player and if the kidney trouble didnt strike, I think he could have pushed for it but probably fall short.

He was behind the greats like Shaq, Ewing, Olajuwon, Robinson etc...

 

[jod23]

Agree with everything but the all-star voting thing. That's pretty irrelevant in regards to how good he is, otherwise we should be talking about Vince Carter more.

Whilst true, just gives you an idea that not only was he good, he was exciting and fans responded by voting in droves to see him in the All Star game.

 

[jod23]

Stockton is, I believe, the second best Point Guard of all time (though I have no issue with people that say he isn't). On my list he's at least Top 30, most likely Top 20, so your talk about him being pushed out by someone else isn't even in my thoughts.

Fair enough, everybody has their own opinion. No way is he the second best PG of all time though. How you can fathom putting him before Zeke is just crazy talk IMO.

But if you have him top 20-30 all time, he isnt gonna fall off your list. If I was ranking that top 50 from 1996, I'd have Stockton near the back of the queue and in jeopardy of falling out.

 

[fidstar]

Fair enough, everybody has their own opinion. No way is he the second best PG of all time though. How you can fathom putting him before Zeke is just crazy talk IMO.

But if you have him top 20-30 all time, he isnt gonna fall off your list. If I was ranking that top 50 from 1996, I'd have Stockton near the back of the queue and in jeopardy of falling out.

Even if Stockton was just in back in 96, he did have 5,000 assists, 2 all-star appearances, 3 All NBA appearances, 2 NBA Finals appearances and 1,000 odd steals afterwards, so he probably moved up a spot or two before he retired.

 

[jod23]

Even if Stockton was just in back in 96, he did have 5,000 assists, 2 all-star appearances, 3 All NBA appearances, 2 NBA Finals appearances and 1,000 odd steals afterwards, so he probably moved up a spot or two before he retired.

Doesnt get him close to Zeke though IMO. A far superior player.

 

[fidstar]

Doesnt get him close to Zeke though IMO. A far superior player.

I have no issue with you saying Isiah was better. "far" is ridiculous though.

 

[jod23]

I have no issue with you saying Isiah was better. "far" is ridiculous though.

He won back to back titles right in the middle of Bird/Magic/Jordan. He was far superior IMO.

 

[fidstar]

He won back to back titles right in the middle of Bird/Magic/Jordan. He was far superior IMO.

He was a member of a team that won back to back titles. Detroit was known as an all-around team, rather than a super-star led team. In neither year did Zeke even finish in an all-nba team, and wasn't even a thought for MVP.

Not taking away from Zeke, as he's a legend. Total respect. But as I said "far" is ridiculous.

 

[Peter Sidorkiewicz]

Pippen shouldn't be a lock.

Dominique Wilkins > Scottie Pippen

 

[Son of Skeletor]

Again im not arguing that Nash should be in before Stockton. Personally I'd take Stockton. Nash was just a name I threw out there for discussion, as I would think every player to have won more than one MVP would be in the top 50. In fact ill quickly check that.

My argument is not with Nash being in, its with your claim that Stockton's candidacy is questionable based on scoring one point per game less than Nash.

Stockton is the all time NBA leader in assists and steals and top ten all time in TS%. It's madness to suggest he wouldn't be in the top 50.

Tons of player have hit game winners in the NBA. The first video though there is no pressure on him as it's a tied game. Utah wont lose if he misses, plus it's a defensive breakdown. Not sure the play is made for him.

Not sure if serious? Only the pressure of making it to the NBA Finals after losing in the WCF three times in five years, but apart from that...

Your argument was that you wouldn't want the ball in his hands to take the pressure shot, and it's not a good one.

When I say you dont want the ball in his hands I meant like being able to create his own shot. He wasnt a scorer who could do this. Good shooter for sure, not afraid of the big shot. Sure. But there would be a whole host of names in the history of the game, you would look to take a game winner before Stockton.

He was a point guard. You want him to make the right decision in crunch time, not just shoot it. Few players made the right decision as often as Stockton.

That was a bizarre year where both teams made it to the Finals without a bonafide second star. You can argue who had the better supporting but you cant argue that Olajuwon was better than Ewing. It's what got Houston over the line.

You argued that Ewing was a winner who was only thwarted from winning the title by Jordan and teams with two superstars or better supporting casts. Houston in 1994 had none of these three things, and neither did Indy in 1995 incidentally. Your argument seems to be that Ewing was a winner, but that he can't be judged on his record because he played in the same conference as Michael Jordan. Well guess what?...

The Knicks led that series 3-2 and Starks had a three in Game 6 at the buzzer. A decent look for the win and the championship. Ewing was so close. Then in Game 7 of that series, Starks shoots 2-18 and 0-11 from deep. He got a lot closer than Mourning ever did.

Guess who knocked out Mourning's team in 1995? And 1996? And again in 1997?

That's a ridiculous argument. That's the butterfly effect. Utah did get close, but they couldnt win one.

Didn't you just make a similar argument for Ewing?

No shame in that, so many great players missed out because of MJ.

And Dick Bavetta.

Again im only mentioning Allen for discussion purposes. He could be there or thereabouts. He'd be a candidate from the past 20 years to maybe have a look at. Again I dont think he makes it. It was just a name I threw out there.

I'm not arguing against Ray Allen as a candidate, only the specious claim that he won titles in 2008 and 2013 makes him a 'winner' and a better candidate than Mourning. You also name-dropped Anthony Davis who is yet to win a single playoff game in his life, and Grant Hill who never got out of the first round. Now either such things matter or they don't, you can't have it both ways.

Well no I wouldnt but Olajuwon, Robinson and Shaq all won title. Ewing got ridiculously close when Jordan was finally out the way. All the other times, he just ran into the GOAT.

Olajuwon won his first title when Jordan retired. Shaq won his first title when Jordan retired and Olajuwon, Robinson and Ewing were all greatly diminished. Robinson himself won a title only after Tim Duncan arrived. And as I've pointed out Ewing didn't run into Jordan in 1994. Or 1995. Or 1997.

Look at the East in 2000-01 - don't you think that Miami would have been favourites to make it to the Finals that year without Zo's freak illness?

Tim Hardaway was a hell of player.

He was, but injuries shortened his career too. By 2000 he was almost done.

He played with Mashburn too who was a star.

Mashburn was not a star in Miami. In fact it was his tendency to go missing in the playoffs that prompted Pat Riley to trade him for Eddie Jones literally weeks before Zo's kidney ailment diagnosis.

I think Hill and Zo are some ways apart. Grant Hill wasnt just tracking for top 50, but like top 15 or so.

That's subjective. You can argue it, but you can't claim it as a self-evident fact because it's not based on any quantitative proof.

Alonzo Mourning was a great player and if the kidney trouble didnt strike, I think he could have pushed for it but probably fall short.

He was behind the greats like Shaq, Ewing, Olajuwon, Robinson etc...

Your initial claim was that Bill Walton, Dave Cowens and Willis Reed were locks, while simultaneously stating that "Mourning was great, but a top 50 player he was not.".

I've never claimed that Mourning was Olajuwon's equal, only that you clearly underrate him. The statistics clearly bear this out.

Doesnt get him (Stockton) close to Zeke though IMO. A far superior player.

I don't agree with this either, it's hyperbole.

 

[jod23]

He was a member of a team that won back to back titles. Detroit was known as an all-around team, rather than a super-star led team. In neither year did Zeke even finish in an all-nba team, and wasn't even a thought for MVP.

Not taking away from Zeke, as he's a legend. Total respect. But as I said "far" is ridiculous.

Huh??? What are you on about?

Detroit were a well rounded team but their clear leader and superstar was Isiah Thomas.

 

[jod23]

Pippen shouldn't be a lock.

Dominique Wilkins > Scottie Pippen

Yeah no. I love 'Nique but Scottie Pippen was far better. The only thing Nique could do better was score. Pippen was the a two way player.

 

[jod23]

My argument is not with Nash being in, its with your claim that Stockton's candidacy is questionable based on scoring one point per game less than Nash.

Stockton is the all time NBA leader in assists and steals and top ten all time in TS%. It's madness to suggest he wouldn't be in the top 50.

Stockton's candidacy is questionable IMO because he wasnt a scorer. I threw Nash's name out there because of the two MVP's he won. Both werent big scorers but Nash has those two MVP's and like I said, every multiple MVP winner was in in 1996.

As for Stockton being the all time leader in assists and steals, while true, that points to his longevity more than anything. Magic dished out more per game. He is 7th all time for steals per game too. Not that they are anything to be sneezed at though.

Anyways, again im not arguing Nash over Stockton. Id take Stockton. I just threw out Nash as a discussion point and IMO Stockton is borderline to remain top 50 if it was re-done today.

Are you saying you would take Stockton over Kobe, Dirk, Duncan, LeBron, Wade?

Not sure if serious? Only the pressure of making it to the NBA Finals after losing in the WCF three times in five years, but apart from that...

Your argument was that you wouldn't want the ball in his hands to take the pressure shot, and it's not a good one.

He was a point guard. You want him to make the right decision in crunch time, not just shoot it. Few players made the right decision as often as Stockton.

Apart from what? Utah arent down one with time ticking down. Stockton hits it, he is the hero. He misses. It's overtime. Much less pressure on that shot, in fact it's freeing as you can only really have upside. You miss, oh well, OT. You hit it, you're the hero. Lots of players want that shot. It's when you are down and you need to hit the shot to win the game, that's real pressure.

Anyways, im just arguing that one shot. Im not saying that Stockton wasnt clutch or that he wasnt a good shooter or that you wouldnt have the ball in his hands with time ticking down. Of course you would, he was their PG and an excellent decision maker. It only becomes a problem if say a great defender is guarding you. Blanketing you. Then Stockton doesnt have that ability to get his own shot. That's what I was saying.

You argued that Ewing was a winner who was only thwarted from winning the title by Jordan and teams with two superstars or better supporting casts. Houston in 1994 had none of these three things, and neither did Indy in 1995 incidentally. Your argument seems to be that Ewing was a winner, but that he can't be judged on his record because he played in the same conference as Michael Jordan. Well guess what?...

Guess who knocked out Mourning's team in 1995? And 1996? And again in 1997?

Again the series in 94 was ridiculously close, could have gone either way, unlucky for Ewing, it didnt fall his way. Starks hits that three in Game 6 and his career is a whole lot different. Mourning may have gotten knocked out by MJ in those years but even if Jordan wasnt around, Mourning's team was never going to go on and win a championship. Ewing's Knicks were a huge chance every year from about 1990 to around 1995 but kept running into MJ.

I'm not arguing against Ray Allen as a candidate, only the specious claim that he won titles in 2008 and 2013 makes him a 'winner' and a better candidate than Mourning. You also name-dropped Anthony Davis who is yet to win a single playoff game in his life, and Grant Hill who never got out of the first round. Now either such things matter or they don't, you can't have it both ways.

It's so hard to rate championships and claiming someone as a winner. Mourning did win a chip let's all remember. He was spent force and just a role player but still. I do think winning a championship while being one of, if not the best player on the team really helps your arguments for top 50 though. That's what it's all about really. Winning chips.

Grant Hill never, ever had any help. I touched on this in an earlier post. It was pretty much him and some scrubs. Then the ankle trouble came. Without the injuries. Hill is definitely in. Same cant be said of Mourning I dont think. He'd definitely be much, much closer.

As for AD, just a talking point. Shaq was in after 4 seasons in the NBA in 96. Davis of course will end up top 50 as he is quite ridic.

Look at the East in 2000-01 - don't you think that Miami would have been favourites to make it to the Finals that year without Zo's freak illness?

Maybe but as you said Hardaway was pretty much done by then. Even if Miami do make the Finals, it would have just been roadkill against Shaq and the Lakers.

That's subjective. You can argue it, but you can't claim it as a self-evident fact because it's not based on any quantitative proof.

Subjective? Proof? Zo was a solid 20/10 guy. Great defender. We'd seen so many of his ilk before. He was really the last of those great C's to come through. Olajuwon, Ewing, Robinson, Shaq, Mourning. All very good defenders, all 20/10 guys. Name another guy though that was doing the kinda stuff Grant Hill was?

You cant. Because nobody was. He was LeBron before LeBron. As I posted earlier he was putting up numbers that put him in conversations with Jordan, LeBron, Baylor, Wilt, Bird. Hill was on track to be an all time great. Absolute lock not just for top 50 but top 20 or top 10. You cant say the same about Zo. And I loved Zo. I was such a huge fan of Charlotte when he was there. They were like my second team. Zo, LJ and Muggsy.

Your initial claim was that Bill Walton, Dave Cowens and Willis Reed were locks, while simultaneously stating that "Mourning was great, but a top 50 player he was not.".

I've never claimed that Mourning was Olajuwon's equal, only that you clearly underrate him. The statistics clearly bear this out.

On reflection. Walton is certainly not a lock. I stand by Cowens and Reed though. Mourning was great and had he not had the kidney problems, he would definitely be in the conversation. But he never got those championships and MVP's and Finals MVP's that guys like Cowens and Reed did get. Even without the injuries I think Zo would be borderline. But again you never know. Maybe without the injuries, he wins heaps of chips and MVP's. We will never know.

It's why Grant Hill isnt in the top 50. He is just a what if.

I don't agree with this either, it's hyperbole.

So you like fidstar also believe Stockton to be greater than Zeke?? Yikes. What is the world coming to??