top 50 players in NBA history - Page 9

mason55 · #81 05-10-2007, 03:00 PM

[ QUOTE ]
lol what does Nash have to do ? Seriously ?

He rides the bench for 2 years because he's undersized and slow. Then from 00-01 his assist totals increased EVERY year. He went from 6.4 to 13.4, bumping his numbers up by 1-2 assist every year. Including his 2 bench years, he's at 17 ppg.

This year he's in the top 30 in scoring, #1 in assists. That's sick. He's shooting over 50 percent as a GUARD. Career 42% from 3.

If he wins his ring and 3rd MVP, how is this guy not on par with Isiah, a career 19/9 guy with 2 rings who never road the bench.

I just don't get what your measure is. The bulk of his career Isiah was a 8 ast/g guy. Why is he instant top 50 and not Nash SHOULD Nash get a ring....

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you [censored] retarded? Seriously? All I said was that MVPs was not a good measure of greatness I didn't say anything about Nash's worthiness.

rafiki · #82 05-10-2007, 03:01 PM

Ya but you can't just use guys who have tons of rings. I could put Horry on if we want to play that game.

kidcolin · #83 05-10-2007, 03:02 PM

mason,

While I see what you're saying, basketball MVPs, All Teams, and All Stars are a better gauge than they are with baseball (especially the first two). There are only a few bad MVP choices, and very few awful. The All Teams are usually very solid, with the only griped being about whether some Team 2 guys should be on Team 1.. that sorta thing. It's just not a big league so it's hard for voters to really blow it, unlike how they routinely get stuff wrong in the MLB.

The fringe awards are dumb (ROY, DPOY, COY), but the ones above I think are pretty solid.

tuq · #84 05-10-2007, 03:03 PM

Re: Boozer. Way too early to crown his ass. Plenty of big guys' careers peaked early. Ralph Sampson, Wes Unseld, Walt Bellamy, et al, and it wasn't always because of injuries.

James282 · #85 05-10-2007, 03:03 PM

haven't read all the responses, but the most common mistake is using stats to compare guys across eras without adjusting for the scoring environments. this same mistake happens with college players all the time because they face such drastically different competition with drastically different styles of play. If Jordan in his prime could have played all his games against the best Princeton teams of the 80s and 90s he wouldn't have been a top ten scorer in college basketball due to so few scoring opportunities. Some eras featured very slowplaced games with more of a focus on ball movement, our era today is one that very much focuses on superstars, scoring titles and the like. Saying 'lol doods Ray Allen has 25 ppg!' is just an irresponsible way to go about comparing him to guys who played in the early 80s and stuff. I don't know much about basketball compared to the die hard fans, but as somewhat of a stat guy I know it's dicey to use raw stats to compare players across different eras.

James

rafiki · #86 05-10-2007, 03:04 PM

lol ok I swear the next person to talk about Boozer. haha I GET IT.

Let's go back to arguing about Nash.

kidcolin · #87 05-10-2007, 03:04 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Hm - am I underrating Kidd or overrating Payton? I always thought Payton > Kidd, close but not very close.

-Al

[/ QUOTE ]

I just say Payton > Kidd because Payton is without a doubt the best trash talker in the league. Plus he wore green for 1 season, and got in Amare's face while doing so. I think you could come up with a bunch of arguments either way, but I think Kidd probably edges him out.

Aloysius · #88 05-10-2007, 03:04 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
maybe Wade

[/ QUOTE ]

Not Wade, imo, he's been exposed he's merely a very good 2-guard in this League.

-Al

[/ QUOTE ]

Wade Stats

Damn, you know I don't watch the Eastern Conf (or Heat) enough I guess. I've always felt Wade is somewhat overrated, but this production is impossible to argue against.

-Al

kidcolin · #89 05-10-2007, 03:06 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I just don't get what your measure is. The bulk of his career Isiah was a 8 ast/g guy. Why is he instant top 50 and not Nash SHOULD Nash get a ring....

[/ QUOTE ]

Because he was the best player on his team and of the best in the league for a VERY long time. It's pretty easy to see, really.

rafiki · #90 05-10-2007, 03:06 PM

[ QUOTE ]
haven't read all the responses, but the most common mistake is using stats to compare guys across eras without adjusting for the scoring environments. this same mistake happens with college players all the time because they face such drastically different competition with drastically different styles of play. If Jordan in his prime could have played all his games against the best Princeton teams of the 80s and 90s he wouldn't have been a top ten scorer in college basketball due to so few scoring opportunities. Some eras featured very slowplaced games with more of a focus on ball movement, our era today is one that very much focuses on superstars, scoring titles and the like. Saying 'lol doods Ray Allen has 25 ppg!' is just an irresponsible way to go about comparing him to guys who played in the early 80s and stuff. I don't know much about basketball compared to the die hard fans, but as somewhat of a stat guy I know it's dicey to use raw stats to compare players across different eras.

James

[/ QUOTE ]

Ya but isn't it a proven fact that scoring has dropped drastically in this era ? Imagine what Allan could have done in the scoring days.

or maybe I'm out to lunch...