Harry Frogfish
Footballguy
You are right, I apologize, profusely. That was Leeroy Jenkins who said it. Anyway, didn't make sense to me.
Sorry I confused you two.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
2021-22 NBA Thread: Bill Simmons furiously recording 2.5 hour long pod about how Boston is still better than Golden State (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Capella
- Start date
- Status
You are right, I apologize, profusely. That was Leeroy Jenkins who said it. Anyway, didn't make sense to me.
Sorry I confused you two.
Leeroy Jenkins
Footballguy
That was me.
Different teams had different hotels, suites, rooms, facilities etc. Lebron wasn’t in the same hotel room as Lillard etc.
I am not saying it wasn’t a hard environment. But that environment benefits a veteran team that had some advantages built in, rather than some others in a normal home-away situation.
Last edited by a moderator:
Leeroy Jenkins
Footballguy
IIRC, 3pm shooting was up in the bubble due to the black background.
Leeroy Jenkins
Footballguy
Also, the time off benefited certain teams and players more as well. Of course, everyone had the same opportunity to get healthy and stay in shape, but still, some guys needed it. Look at the Lakers since the bubble ….
Capella
Footballguy
But again, it was the same for everybody. The very definition of fair.
As for different hotels, Disney has a quite a number of elite hotels there so nobody was staying at a comfort inn. And they all had their own beds brought in. Sorry, you’re just reaching here.
jvdesigns2002
Footballguy
The whole complaining about the bubble thing is weird. IMO—the vast majority of people that I see that complain about the bubble somehow do it as a vector to be dismissive of the Lakers (and Lebrons) ring. However—a lot of the same people use the bubble to be supportive of players they like. I know a lot of people that are dismissive of the Lakers title in the bubble—but at the same time believe that Jamal Murray is a superstar because of what he did in the bubble. Just seems hypocritical.
dickey moe
Fingerpicker
Has there ever been a FBG poll on the top NBA players of all time? Might be fun. Top 10 would probably be too restrictive but I’d like to see a Top 20 list.
jvdesigns2002
Footballguy
There are lots of people that put him in superstar status. I don’t agree with that opinion—I think he’s just a good to really good player—but his performance in the bubble leads a lot of people to believe that he’s basically all star caliber. I got back into sports card collecting in 2018–and even last year (when he was hurt)—there were lots of hobbyists investing thousands to tens of thousands of dollars into Jamal Murray stuff
My point is this. Most people that look at the bubble use it to be supportive for a player like Murray. His “stock” went up. However—a lot of those same people who believe that Murray’s stock went up in the bubble use the bubble as an excuse to bring the Lakers and Lebrons stock down
Last edited by a moderator:
identikit
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
offdee
Footballguy
identikit
Footballguy
Leeroy Jenkins
Footballguy
1. Jordan
2. Russell
3. Lebron
4. Magic
5. Wilt
6. Kareem
7. Shaq
8. Duncan
9. Kobe
10. Bird
11. Hakeem
12. Curry
13. Robertson
14. Dr. J
15. KD
16. Garnett
17. Barkley
18. Karl Malone
19. Wade
20. Iverson (but like 20 to 30 can depend on your feelings any given day)
2. Russell
3. Lebron
4. Magic
5. Wilt
6. Kareem
7. Shaq
8. Duncan
9. Kobe
10. Bird
11. Hakeem
12. Curry
13. Robertson
14. Dr. J
15. KD
16. Garnett
17. Barkley
18. Karl Malone
19. Wade
20. Iverson (but like 20 to 30 can depend on your feelings any given day)
Anarchy99
Footballguy
Stop the madness!
Curry can revive GOAT debate: If Stephen Curry matches LeBron James with a fourth ring, then it'll be time to reconsider who's the best player of their era.
Stephen Curry leading the Warriors to another NBA title would stir up a new round of GOAT debates
If Curry matches LeBron with a fourth ring, there's no Euro stepping the conversation
By Bill Reiter
SAN FRANCISCO -- The Golden State Warriors are closing in on a fourth NBA championship. Which means Stephen Curry is closing in on something even more impressive: The legacy of LeBron James, and the surprising spoils that come with such a chase.
Because even if he doesn't catch LeBron -- and he may -- Curry is well positioned this month to pass names like Kobe, Durant, Bird, Magic and Wilt on the all-time great list.
Through eight years of Warriors domination, Curry has been his team's talisman and catalyst. Under his surprising but unrelenting excellence, a rising tide of success and celebration has emerged because of him.
Klay Thompson and Draymond Green have emerged as sure-fire Hall of Fame players. Steve Kerr went from failed general manager and TV analyst to anointed as, literally, one of the game's best 15 coaches in the sport's history. Andrew Wiggins has reclaimed his promise. Jordan Poole went from G League hopeful to third splash brother. And so on.
Curry spurred all of this into being. His greatness has brought rings, legacies, wealth, a new stadium and even another all-time great, Kevin Durant, to an organization that before Curry's arrival and ascension was among the worst in the history of American sports.
Heck, these days Curry racks up more television minutes than game minutes.
Now, only the Celtics stand in the way of him capturing as many rings as LeBron, a fact that requires a sudden wake-up call about the way we thought we understood this era of basketball and those who preceded it.
We've spent so much time focusing on LeBron vs. Jordan that we missed the fact that a share of The King's present crown may wind up being sent up the coast -- at least for a summer.
Already, the collective media and fan awakening to Steph's growing legacy has spurred conversations about whether he can pass LeBron's standing on the list of all-time greats, and for understandable reasons.
That is, after all, the barometer for how we measure greatness today. The fact Steph bested LeBron in three series doesn't hurt, either.
And while LeBron toils with a Lakers organization he helped usher into likely irrelevance, Steph could very well enter next season as the betting favorite to again win it all. It is not inconceivable that we're on our way to a reality that sees Steph someday retire with more championships than LeBron.
So the Steph-could-be-better-than-LeBron conversation isn't insane. Steph is the greatest shooter in the history of the sport -- so great, in fact, he changed the NBA and shifted the course of its history as much as Wilt, or Bird-Magic, or Jordan. The game's focus on 3-point shooting and positionless play is rooted first and foremost in Curry.
He defined, and changed, an era.
All-time greatness is an interesting concoction of competing interests: Individual accomplishments, sure, but also team success. And luck. And the narratives that shape how we perceive -- and remember -- those rarest of stars.
Steph has a claim in all these categories.
His individual resume is astounding: Two MVPs (one unanimous). The most three-point shots ever made. Career shooting percentages of 47.3 from the field, 42.8 from 3 and 90.8 from the stripe. One of only 11 players to claim a 50-40-90 season. And so on.
The team success Curry has spawned is also beyond dispute. There are the three rings and counting, yes, but also a run of six NBA Finals appearances in eight seasons. Kobe Bryant never did that. Nor Tim Duncan. LeBron did get to eight in a row, but he wasn't able to do it with the same team. Only Steph, in this century, was able to stay and still thrive at this level.
He's also, as noted, turned other players into Hall of Fame candidates. Jordan did that, most likely, but it's hard to say the same for LeBron. That, too, matters, even if it's harder to measure or prove.
And as the best shooter ever, and the guy who didn't bounce from team to team, his narrative game is on point. This is the guy Durant had to join, rather than the other way around. And yet Curry, the then-reigning MVP, welcomed Durant to the team by subjugating his own shine -- and the shots, accolades and credit that accompanied it. Everyone says the team and winning come first. Curry practiced that by diminishing himself to do so.
No all-time great has ever done that in his prime. That, too, is easy to look past but worthy of consideration in any GOAT debate.
That is a big part of the reason Curry is the superior player, historically speaking, to Durant. Durant needed Curry to win titles. Curry is about to prove, he, most decidedly, did not need Durant. That -- plus the statistical reality of Steph's import over Durant when on the floor in Golden State, as often outlined excellently by NBA writer Tom Haberstroh -- elevates Curry over Durant.
There is no Golden State Warriors as we know them without Steph. And without Steph, Durant might have as many rings as James Harden or Russell Westbrook.
The argument over Steph vs. Durant is a warmup for the one about Steph vs. LeBron. Steph, by NBA standards, is not an imposing athlete. He's not a freak of nature physically -- not like M.J., or LeBron, or Kareem, or Wilt, or Shaq, or Magic, or virtually any of the other all-time greats who look more like Avengers superheroes than athletes.
That's part of how, even now, too many have missed Steph's greatness. They've also often overlooked the way his individual genius works seamlessly with his teammates, lifting them up, making them better, putting them in positions to find the best versions of their basketball selves.
The literal space alone Curry creates for teammates -- the gravitational pull he exerts on defenses, and all that then does for everyone lucky enough to play with him -- is hard to measure but impossible to miss. He is a game-changer, literally, the moment he simply touches the ball or passes halfcourt.
Yet LeBron is, well, LeBron. He will almost certainly end his career as the game's all-time leading scorer. LeBron is already seventh on the all-time assists list. He's been chasing, and chasing down, Jordan for a reason. He's astounding, and this run by Steph doesn't change any of that, even if it does close the gap.
As we always do, then, the talk on Steph Curry both celebrates him and misses the larger, current point. Curry coming up on LeBron's legacy, true and interesting though it is, still probably ends with LeBron ahead when both retire.
But that's not the actual point, at least not today.
This is: The fact we're having this conversation means that if Steph does lead Golden State to a fourth title starting Thursday, he'll narrow the gap between himself and LeBron so much that it is other all-time greats who he will have surpassed.
Names like Kobe. Duncan. Durant. Bird. Magic.
Another title, and Steph and the Warriors show that everything that's preceded this was about Steph Curry. Not Durant and the two titles he piggy-backed on board for, despite his obvious contributions. Not Kyrie Irving leaving Cleveland. Just an all-time great shaping the game's history, and his team's destiny, utilizing his own rare, astounding gifts.
Another title, and the all-time great debate looks something like this:
Jordan
LeBron
Kareem
Shaq
Steph
Can Steph eventually pass LeBron? Maybe, but unlikely.
But beat the Celtics, and he will have launched himself further than any one of his patented deep shots.
Curry can revive GOAT debate: If Stephen Curry matches LeBron James with a fourth ring, then it'll be time to reconsider who's the best player of their era.
Stephen Curry leading the Warriors to another NBA title would stir up a new round of GOAT debates
If Curry matches LeBron with a fourth ring, there's no Euro stepping the conversation
By Bill Reiter
SAN FRANCISCO -- The Golden State Warriors are closing in on a fourth NBA championship. Which means Stephen Curry is closing in on something even more impressive: The legacy of LeBron James, and the surprising spoils that come with such a chase.
Because even if he doesn't catch LeBron -- and he may -- Curry is well positioned this month to pass names like Kobe, Durant, Bird, Magic and Wilt on the all-time great list.
Through eight years of Warriors domination, Curry has been his team's talisman and catalyst. Under his surprising but unrelenting excellence, a rising tide of success and celebration has emerged because of him.
Klay Thompson and Draymond Green have emerged as sure-fire Hall of Fame players. Steve Kerr went from failed general manager and TV analyst to anointed as, literally, one of the game's best 15 coaches in the sport's history. Andrew Wiggins has reclaimed his promise. Jordan Poole went from G League hopeful to third splash brother. And so on.
Curry spurred all of this into being. His greatness has brought rings, legacies, wealth, a new stadium and even another all-time great, Kevin Durant, to an organization that before Curry's arrival and ascension was among the worst in the history of American sports.
Heck, these days Curry racks up more television minutes than game minutes.
Now, only the Celtics stand in the way of him capturing as many rings as LeBron, a fact that requires a sudden wake-up call about the way we thought we understood this era of basketball and those who preceded it.
We've spent so much time focusing on LeBron vs. Jordan that we missed the fact that a share of The King's present crown may wind up being sent up the coast -- at least for a summer.
Already, the collective media and fan awakening to Steph's growing legacy has spurred conversations about whether he can pass LeBron's standing on the list of all-time greats, and for understandable reasons.
That is, after all, the barometer for how we measure greatness today. The fact Steph bested LeBron in three series doesn't hurt, either.
And while LeBron toils with a Lakers organization he helped usher into likely irrelevance, Steph could very well enter next season as the betting favorite to again win it all. It is not inconceivable that we're on our way to a reality that sees Steph someday retire with more championships than LeBron.
So the Steph-could-be-better-than-LeBron conversation isn't insane. Steph is the greatest shooter in the history of the sport -- so great, in fact, he changed the NBA and shifted the course of its history as much as Wilt, or Bird-Magic, or Jordan. The game's focus on 3-point shooting and positionless play is rooted first and foremost in Curry.
He defined, and changed, an era.
All-time greatness is an interesting concoction of competing interests: Individual accomplishments, sure, but also team success. And luck. And the narratives that shape how we perceive -- and remember -- those rarest of stars.
Steph has a claim in all these categories.
His individual resume is astounding: Two MVPs (one unanimous). The most three-point shots ever made. Career shooting percentages of 47.3 from the field, 42.8 from 3 and 90.8 from the stripe. One of only 11 players to claim a 50-40-90 season. And so on.
The team success Curry has spawned is also beyond dispute. There are the three rings and counting, yes, but also a run of six NBA Finals appearances in eight seasons. Kobe Bryant never did that. Nor Tim Duncan. LeBron did get to eight in a row, but he wasn't able to do it with the same team. Only Steph, in this century, was able to stay and still thrive at this level.
He's also, as noted, turned other players into Hall of Fame candidates. Jordan did that, most likely, but it's hard to say the same for LeBron. That, too, matters, even if it's harder to measure or prove.
And as the best shooter ever, and the guy who didn't bounce from team to team, his narrative game is on point. This is the guy Durant had to join, rather than the other way around. And yet Curry, the then-reigning MVP, welcomed Durant to the team by subjugating his own shine -- and the shots, accolades and credit that accompanied it. Everyone says the team and winning come first. Curry practiced that by diminishing himself to do so.
No all-time great has ever done that in his prime. That, too, is easy to look past but worthy of consideration in any GOAT debate.
That is a big part of the reason Curry is the superior player, historically speaking, to Durant. Durant needed Curry to win titles. Curry is about to prove, he, most decidedly, did not need Durant. That -- plus the statistical reality of Steph's import over Durant when on the floor in Golden State, as often outlined excellently by NBA writer Tom Haberstroh -- elevates Curry over Durant.
There is no Golden State Warriors as we know them without Steph. And without Steph, Durant might have as many rings as James Harden or Russell Westbrook.
The argument over Steph vs. Durant is a warmup for the one about Steph vs. LeBron. Steph, by NBA standards, is not an imposing athlete. He's not a freak of nature physically -- not like M.J., or LeBron, or Kareem, or Wilt, or Shaq, or Magic, or virtually any of the other all-time greats who look more like Avengers superheroes than athletes.
That's part of how, even now, too many have missed Steph's greatness. They've also often overlooked the way his individual genius works seamlessly with his teammates, lifting them up, making them better, putting them in positions to find the best versions of their basketball selves.
The literal space alone Curry creates for teammates -- the gravitational pull he exerts on defenses, and all that then does for everyone lucky enough to play with him -- is hard to measure but impossible to miss. He is a game-changer, literally, the moment he simply touches the ball or passes halfcourt.
Yet LeBron is, well, LeBron. He will almost certainly end his career as the game's all-time leading scorer. LeBron is already seventh on the all-time assists list. He's been chasing, and chasing down, Jordan for a reason. He's astounding, and this run by Steph doesn't change any of that, even if it does close the gap.
As we always do, then, the talk on Steph Curry both celebrates him and misses the larger, current point. Curry coming up on LeBron's legacy, true and interesting though it is, still probably ends with LeBron ahead when both retire.
But that's not the actual point, at least not today.
This is: The fact we're having this conversation means that if Steph does lead Golden State to a fourth title starting Thursday, he'll narrow the gap between himself and LeBron so much that it is other all-time greats who he will have surpassed.
Names like Kobe. Duncan. Durant. Bird. Magic.
Another title, and Steph and the Warriors show that everything that's preceded this was about Steph Curry. Not Durant and the two titles he piggy-backed on board for, despite his obvious contributions. Not Kyrie Irving leaving Cleveland. Just an all-time great shaping the game's history, and his team's destiny, utilizing his own rare, astounding gifts.
Another title, and the all-time great debate looks something like this:
Jordan
LeBron
Kareem
Shaq
Steph
Can Steph eventually pass LeBron? Maybe, but unlikely.
But beat the Celtics, and he will have launched himself further than any one of his patented deep shots.
Anarchy99
Footballguy
As for this statement in the article above: "Klay Thompson and Draymond Green have emerged as sure-fire Hall of Fame players."
Basketball Reference has Klay's HOF probability listed at 51.3% and Draymond at 59.7%. They haven't stopped playing, so those chance will likely rise if they still play well. But I am not sure they are sure-fire HOFers as of today.
Basketball Reference has Klay's HOF probability listed at 51.3% and Draymond at 59.7%. They haven't stopped playing, so those chance will likely rise if they still play well. But I am not sure they are sure-fire HOFers as of today.
Jayrod
Footballguy
I don't consider Klay a lock but Draymond is, IMO.
Draymond has 7 All-D teams, 2 All-NBA's, 4 ASG's & a DPOY on top of 3 rings which is a lot of hardware and he is the clear cut best defender on those championship teams.
Klay doesn't have quite the individual accolades and his offensive game has benefitted greatly from playing with Curry for his entire career and also Durant for most of his peak years. For 2 of his 3 rings, he was the #3 option on offense and has never been the best offensive player or defender on his own team.
Win a 4th ring and both will get a bump, especially if either of them has a standout series or wins Finals MVP but Klay just feels a notch below, IMO.
Navin Johnson
Footballguy
Those probabilities are drastically under calculated. Of the twelve retired players over 44% but below Draymond, all twelve are in the Hof.
Anarchy99
Footballguy
Green has 0 first team All-NBA's. He was second team once and third team once. Klay has two third team selections. Maybe that is picking nits, but in my HOF, I would look at guys with multi-time first team selections.
By comparison, first team all-NBA selections for some other notable guys . . .
LeBron - 13
Kobe - 11
Duncan - 10
Shaq - 8
KD - 6
Harden - 6
Howard - 5
Kidd - 5
Giannis - 4
Dirk - 4
Paul - 4
Robinson - 4
Garnett - 4
David - 4
Kawhi - 3
Jokic - 3
Luka - 3
Sure, a bunch of those guys haven't won multi titles, but they had exemplary seasons on multiple occasions. Klay and Dray have been very good players as the 2nd / 3rd / 4th guys on championship teams. Yes, important pieces, but not the main cogs on their teams. Both may someday make the HOF, but I wouldn't say they were sure-fire locks.
wikkidpissah
Footballguy
Curry's top 10 alltime. while i am generally very choose-up oriented (would still pick Magic #1) on lists, we simply wouldnt have 6'9 guys from Mississippi fluent in treys without him. he is as unprecedented as Jordan, LeBron, Magic, Bird and Wilt/Kareem
Anarchy99
Footballguy
Of the current players with chances listed at over 44%, are these guys HOFers? Joe Johnson, LeMarcus Aldridge, Blake Griffin, Rajon Rondo, Kevin Love, Kyle Lowry? John Wall is only 4 spots away in the rankings to get to the 44% level . . . how about him?
On the HOF probability list, Dray is at 115 and Klay is at 112. I get it, there are 34 guys in the HOF that had chances lower than those two. Like other sports, the NBA has a bunch of guys that probably belong in the Hall of Very Good. Both guys have had great careers, but they haven't been in the same tier as guys like Steph and KD. Put Klay on the Magic and Dray on the Pistons for the past 10 years and neither guy would be getting much buzz for HOF consideration. Things didn't work out like that, and they were fortune to be on teams with Steph and KD.
Anarchy99
Footballguy
Please post your all-time list of Top 10 NBA players. Just curious who you would leave out. You already listed 7 if you have Steph, Jordan, LeBron, Magic, Bird, Wilt, and Kareem. There's still Kobe, Shaq, Russell, Duncan, Robertson, etc.
Navin Johnson
Footballguy
There around 105 retired players with higher scores than Klay, of which, only nine are not in yet. Of those nine, six are shoo-ins imo (Pau, Dirk, Wade, Vince, Parker, Chauncey.) Klay and Dray are both getting in.
wikkidpissah
Footballguy
well, Russ is with Willie Mays & Ali as my sportsgods, so......Kobe, i guess, then KG to throw a wrench. no order - dont enjoy that exercise (Magic, Jordan, LeBron, Bird, Russ my alltime starters, if that helps) i like Hakeem over Shaq (top5 unprecendented but unrepentently unrefined, and that's big with me) and KG over TD (still hold against him that he wouldnt defend Shaq when it mattered), but stipulate those as personal biases.
Last edited by a moderator:
Charlie Harper
Footballguy
I mean if Tim Hardway and Ben Wallace are in the HOF then Klay and Dray deserve to be.
Jayrod
Footballguy
I'm becoming a huge fan of Ime Udoka as he has continually pushed the right buttons for a team that almost no one foresaw making a Finals run.
This article is great and gives insight into who he is and where he came from.
This article is great and gives insight into who he is and where he came from.
Jayrod
Footballguy
I feel like Hardaway is a borderline candidate, but his longevity seems to have pushed him over the edge. I will say his advanced stats grade out pretty well also.
Ben Wallace, however, was a 4x DPOY (tied for most in NBA history). Considering half of the game is defense and for 4 seasons he was considered the best in the league and also was a key piece on a championship caliber team makes him a shoe-in in my opinion.
Capella
Footballguy
My unpopular take is that Russell and Wilt shouldn’t be considered for top-10 status because of their gigantic lack of competition in their era. And sure I get that they dominated their era but the competition was just so bad.
Also why I roll my eyes at titles won in the 50s and 60s (college football is even worse about this).
Also why I roll my eyes at titles won in the 50s and 60s (college football is even worse about this).
identikit
Footballguy
That could make Gobert a 3/4 shoo-in then?
3 DPOY, no championship but an Olympic silver medal
Anarchy99
Footballguy
If we ignore championships (which admittedly is a big part of the Klay and Dray story) . . .
Klay
2-time Third Team All-NBA
1-time All-Defense Second Team
5-time All Star
Dray
1-time Second Team All-NBA, 1-time Third Team All-NBA
4-time All-Defense First Team, 3-time All-Defense Second Team, 1-time DPOY
4-time All Star
Hardaway
1-time First Team All-NBA, 3-time Second Team All-NBA, 1-time Third Team All-NBA
5-time All Star
Wallace
3-time Second Team All-NBA, 2-time Third Team All-NBA
5-time All-Defense First Team, 1-time All-Defense Second Team, 4-time DPOY
4-time All Star
1-time NBA Championship
Without the rings that Klay and Dray have, a case could be made that Hardaway and Wallace got more recognition than the GS duo. Hardaway only advanced to the conference finals once. I have a tough time wondering about defensive specialists and the HOF. Wallace averaged 5.7 ppg. Draymond is at 6.2. Rodman was at 7.3. In an era with scoring at uber high levels, to me it's tough to consider lower scoring defensive specialists in the elite strata. A guy like Gobert averages 12.4 points. Lots of other multi-time All-Defense players score as well.
Navin Johnson
Footballguy
I'm with you here. Anything pre-merger needs to be taken with a gigantic grain of salt just as anything before 1947 in baseball
Navin Johnson
Footballguy
Anarchy99
Footballguy
I guess I should have said he was a player with limited scoring. He gets a lot of assists, but he doesn't really get a lot of rebounds. He's more of a facilitator / distributor. Because of that, his numbers don't really jump off the page . . . is he even a Top 60 fantasy option? Green is a bit of a unicorn. He's not a traditional player and services a hybrid role. It's tough to get excited about a team's 4th best scorer (or this year 5th best scorer).
Leeroy Jenkins
Footballguy
But they did play against each other. And I don't care what era you are in -- he won 11 NBA titles during a 13 year career (and was in 12 NBA finals). Was the coach as well for the last two. Not to mention 2 NCAA titles and a 55 game winning streak in college to boot.
Navin Johnson
Footballguy
You don't have to look much further than their W-L record when he was out. I get that everyone likes guys that compile but the voters will remember the difference he made on both ends of the floor. I actually think he gets in on first ballot.
Jayrod
Footballguy
I hate Draymond, but he is a HOFer already.
I like Klay, but I don't think he is...yet.
I also think Tim Hardaway is one of the weakest HOFers, but Ben Wallace belongs in hands down.
But then again, I like defensive standouts a lot and think defense is highly underrated among a lot of casual hoops fans.
I like Klay, but I don't think he is...yet.
I also think Tim Hardaway is one of the weakest HOFers, but Ben Wallace belongs in hands down.
But then again, I like defensive standouts a lot and think defense is highly underrated among a lot of casual hoops fans.
Anarchy99
Footballguy
Hard to tell the overall impact of individual players when multiple players were banged up and out of the lineup . . . Dray (36 missed games), Steph (18 missed games) and Klay (50 missed games)
scoobus
Footballguy
Gobert's a guy who I guess could get in due to compiling of awards, but no way do I watch him and see a HOFer.
Navin Johnson
Footballguy
Anarchy99
Footballguy
identikit
Footballguy
Navin Johnson
Footballguy
Anarchy99
Footballguy
In the era since Jaylen Brown joined the Celtics, Boston has gone 8-4 against GS. Here is the tale of the tape . . .
BOS 107.8 ppg
GS 101.8 ppg
BOS 43.8 FG%
GS 43.8 FG%
BOS 37% 3P FG%
GS 31% 3P FG%
BOS 13.1 3P
GS 10.9 3P
Boston had a +6 scoring margin with 6.6 points coming from 3 pointers. GS averaged 113 PPG in those seasons . . . so Boston held them to -11.2 vs. their usual scoring output.
BOS 107.8 ppg
GS 101.8 ppg
BOS 43.8 FG%
GS 43.8 FG%
BOS 37% 3P FG%
GS 31% 3P FG%
BOS 13.1 3P
GS 10.9 3P
Boston had a +6 scoring margin with 6.6 points coming from 3 pointers. GS averaged 113 PPG in those seasons . . . so Boston held them to -11.2 vs. their usual scoring output.
Last edited by a moderator:
Chaos Commish
Footballguy
This is me too. I could cobble together my top 10-15 and the eyes would start rolling at all the more recent/current players I would rank. I consider all the film I've watched from the 50s-70s and roll my eyes right back.
Imagine, oh, Donovan Mitchell or Zach Levine taking their current skillsets with them and time traveling to the 60s. They'd be legends, first ballot HoFers, and on most of these lists.
IF I suspend that thinking, which feel is stupid, I think Dr. J and McHale deserve more love.
Last edited by a moderator:
Anarchy99
Footballguy
Comparing players from different eras is next to impossible. Using football as an example, there are 380-pound lineman now. What would happen if they went up against guys 230 pounds from 50 years ago? They would need stretchers and body bags. But that's not what happened, and we don't have time machines. Players played in the era that they played in. All we can do is compare players in their own eras and evaluate how dominant they were in their time.
Sometimes an era a guy played in could hurt more than it helped. In the NBA, guys that were strong outside shooters before they added the three-point line could have scored more if those shots counted for 3 points. Similarly, people point to the rather tepid three-point numbers from guys in the 80's, but that was before teams figured out that shooting 40% from distance is the same as shooting 60% on two pointers.
Someone like Wilt was dominant in his day because there weren't many skilled players his size. Is that really that much different than Shaq? O'Neal was 7'1", 325. That's 50 pounds more than Chamberlain. Who was there that was going to slow down Shaq Diesel?
Tau837
Footballguy
I don't follow the basketball HOF closely, in part because IMO the idea that guys like Tim Hardaway, Chauncey Billups, Klay Thompson, and Draymond Green are shoo-ins doesn't make sense to me. In fact, it is worse than that, for me it cheapens the whole notion of what the HOF is supposed to represent. Similar to the MLB HOF and the Rock and Roll HOF.
Maybe the problem with this is the basketball-reference method for determining similarity scores, but these are the ones shown for Green:
- Gordon Hayward
- Lamar Odom
- Nene
- Kevin Willis
- Christian Laettner
- Bob Boozer
- Terry Dischinger
- Vin Baker
- Scott Wedman
- Red Robbins
- Baron Davis
- Mitch Richmond
- Cuttino Mobley
- Carl Braun
- Tom Gola
- **** Barnett
- World B. Free
- Mike Conley
- George Hill
- Vern Fleming
Navin Johnson
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
Navin Johnson
Footballguy
Pre-merger basketball was just doesn't compare at all to today's game. Less than 25 African-Americans in the league. Game played between 125-130 pace. Teams shot 35-40% (thats like 50+ more rebounds/game available.) And then guys generally just couldn't go to their off hand (a problem that persisted into the 80's.)
Charlie Harper
Footballguy
There's no way Klay and Dray aren't locks for HoF as the core for 3 titles. Yes, individually their resumes may not be enough on their own but the titles will count towards their HoF resume just like college and international experience counts. If those titles should count is a different discussion.
Tau837
Footballguy
To the extent that I have commented on this, I'm not saying they won't get in given the established standard for the basketball HOF. I'm saying the standard should be considerably higher, in which case they would not be locks as we sit here today.
- Status
Similar threads
