First to 50 in the West

[WayOutWest]

The 90's was the most watered down talent pool I have ever seen,

It is a tribute to Hakeem that the Rockets accomplished what they did with him being the sole all-star on their first title run.

If you watched this series, it was post one or two guys while the other three-four stood around the arc.  The most trey attempts in NBA playoff history at 410?  Vernon Maxwell and Boby Horry alone had 228.

In addition to a young Bob Horry doing 30 mpg, Otis Thorpe averaged a double double for the playoffs.

Hakeem was great, but he had help.

Hakeem was the Walton is his era in the title year.  Those guys were no scrubs but they were not all-stars either.

[Randy]

It is a great accomplishment -- however, as I pointed out before, I hate to just use 50 wins per season for any length of time as the only criteria for judging a top player (past or present) in this league.  TD is going to go down as one of the best players to ever play in this league -- he has been incredibly consistent on both ends of the court and without him there is no way that the Spurs would have ever continued this streak.  But there are other players who have been just as good, Hakeem comes to mind, who just didn't have the rest of the team to make that happen. 

You are right, Randy.  There was nothing special about Magic, Bird or Russell.  There have been several players just as good.  It was just the fact that they (Russell/Bird/Magic) had better teams around them.  In fact I think I will start a crusade to stop referring to those teams as Russell's Celtics or Bird's Celtics or Magic's Lakers.  It is obvious that players like Oscar Robertson would have led their team to much higher accomplishments if they had the same advantage of superior teammates.

BTW Hakeem in his 17 years with Houston led them to only 5 seasons of 50+ wins and the best streak was two years in a row.  They didn't even win 50 in their second championship season.

Lurker, sometimes reasoning with you is a lost cause.  Of COURSE there was something special about Magic, Bird, Russell and TD -- however, it wasn't because they lead their teams to 50+ points in each of those seasons.  If this is all the criteria you use for evaluating a player, then these guys were far more special than that MJ guy (who, IMO, was the most talented player to ever play the game).  These guys deserve their props for winning so consistently but it has a lot to do with the teammates they are playing with, doesn't it?  After all, what about the year that TD went down with injuries? 

I sure wouldn't say that I think that Bird was a more special player than Oscar Robinson.  I think the Big O was one of the best players to ever play the game -- and he definately made his teammates better or he would have averaged almost 10 assists over the lifetime of his career (which is even more amazing when you see that he 26 ppg, 4 blocks, 7 1/2 rebounds, and a fg% of 48%.  I think the Big O is a better player than Bird.

As I have said before, TD is going to earn his own merit by being one of the top players to have ever played the game and he has definately made his teammates better because he makes the game easier for them, more wideopen looks because he requires a double team and so much focus from opponents defense.  However, you can't use that as the only criteria for elevating players to the top of the history of the NBA.  It CAN be part of the criteria but if that's all you use it gives them an unfair advantage.  Hakeem was one of the top centers to ever play the game and among the best players to ever play the game.  Same could be said of Oscar Robinson.  You can't penalize these players simply because they didn't have the team gathered with them that Magic, Bird, Rusell and TD had.  ALL of these players stand out on their own and they were all very vital to reaching the 50 wins each season. 

Look at Magic's team:  Magic; Byron Scott or Norm Nixon and Coop; James Worthy; Mychal Thompson and AC Green; Kareem.  Magic is cemented into the history books as one of the best players to play the game because he earned it.  But his team MIGHT have been able to win 50 games even without him (although we saw what happened in the playoffs when they lost him). 

All of these players are incredible players -- I'm not moving TD over Oscar Robinson or Hakeem just because he had better teammates and won more games consistently over the years than they did.  That sounds like an award for the teams GM and managements -- not just the players.

[Lurker]

And Randy your continued dis of all things SA is amazing for a self proclaimed "objective" poster.

Yes, there have been several superstars in the NBA.  Yes the 4 mentioned are definately among that crowd.  But once there you have to find a way to differentiate them.  Laker fans like to point to rings...at least until someone tries to say Horry is one of the greatest ever because of his rings.  So titles are one measurement.  Consistant team success year after year is another way to differentiate among superstars.  Jordan's Bulls teams would have been on the list if he hadn't decided to play baseball for 2 years.  They won 50+ games 8 out of 9 years.

The Bad Boy Pistons could "only" put together a string of 5 years.

The Stockton/Malone Jazz had strings of 4 & 5 ending up with 9 50+ seasons out of 10.

So it takes more than just "great teams" to raise someone to that level of consistancy.  Also as you pointed out injuries can derail that type of continued success.  Also coaching can be a factor.  But bottom line is that consistantly winning...be it regular season or playoffs...has been the standard by which most athletes are judged.  And just because the Spurs have accomplished something that only the Celtics and your precious Lakers have done you want to downplay the accomplishment.

Why not just give props...especially to your proclaimed "favorite" Spurs player?

[Randy]

Personally, I think TD belongs on the list with Magic, Bird and Russell because of HIS play

It is a great accomplishment

TD is going to go down as one of the best players to ever play in this league -- he has been incredibly consistent on both ends of the court and without him there is no way that the Spurs would have ever continued this streak.

TD is going to earn his own merit by being one of the top players to have ever played the game and he has definately made his teammates better because he makes the game easier for them, more wideopen looks because he requires a double team and so much focus from opponents defense.

Wow, if this is a dis of TD then Reality is an objective NBA fan!

I already gave props to TD -- and to the Spurs for the streak -- but you are wanting to use this streak as an indication that TD should be elevated to a very elite status.  Would TD have earned 50 wins if the weighted ping pong ball had been given to the Vancouver Grizzlies instead?  I don't think so!  And I certainly wouldn't have thought any LESS of him, as a player, if he hadn't had such a streak.  I think this has  a WHOLE lot more to do with teams rather than individuals.

So you think that Magic, Bird, Russell, and TD were more significant than Oscar Robinson, Hakeem, Wilt Chamberlain, etc?  Obviously I think Magic was one of the best (top 5) players to ever play the game.  He belongs right there with Oscar Robinson -- I certainly wouldn't put Magic above the Big O simply because Magic got the opportunity to play with better teammates. 

I'll give ALL the props in the world to the Spurs team for such an accomplishment -- but I don't think it goes to one individual.  I don't think that ANY individual wins 50+ games a year by themselves.  The Spurs as an organization deserve props for this -- the team deserves props -- the coach deserves props and then the Spurs can count themselves lucky that their main players were able to play most of the season in those years. 

If you read all of that as dissing TD, then I guess I'll just keep dissing. 

I think TD IS a special player -- but I don't believe the criteria you are putting forward here is an adequate one to show just how great a player someone is.  There are some players who are JUST as good -- perhaps even better than TD that don't fit this criteria.  I just don't believe it's objective enough to determine who are the "special" players in the NBA (past or present).

[Lurker]

Personally, I think TD belongs on the list with Magic, Bird and Russell because of HIS play

It is a great accomplishment

TD is going to go down as one of the best players to ever play in this league -- he has been incredibly consistent on both ends of the court and without him there is no way that the Spurs would have ever continued this streak.

TD is going to earn his own merit by being one of the top players to have ever played the game and he has definately made his teammates better because he makes the game easier for them, more wideopen looks because he requires a double team and so much focus from opponents defense.

Wow, if this is a dis of TD then Reality is an objective NBA fan!

I already gave props to TD -- and to the Spurs for the streak -- but you are wanting to use this streak as an indication that TD should be elevated to a very elite status.  Would TD have earned 50 wins if the weighted ping pong ball had been given to the Vancouver Grizzlies instead?  I don't think so!  And I certainly wouldn't have thought any LESS of him, as a player, if he hadn't had such a streak.  I think this has  a WHOLE lot more to do with teams rather than individuals.

So you think that Magic, Bird, Russell, and TD were more significant than Oscar Robinson, Hakeem, Wilt Chamberlain, etc?  Obviously I think Magic was one of the best (top 5) players to ever play the game.  He belongs right there with Oscar Robinson -- I certainly wouldn't put Magic above the Big O simply because Magic got the opportunity to play with better teammates. 

I'll give ALL the props in the world to the Spurs team for such an accomplishment -- but I don't think it goes to one individual.  I don't think that ANY individual wins 50+ games a year by themselves.  The Spurs as an organization deserve props for this -- the team deserves props -- the coach deserves props and then the Spurs can count themselves lucky that their main players were able to play most of the season in those years. 

If you read all of that as dissing TD, then I guess I'll just keep dissing. 

I think TD IS a special player -- but I don't believe the criteria you are putting forward here is an adequate one to show just how great a player someone is.  There are some players who are JUST as good -- perhaps even better than TD that don't fit this criteria.  I just don't believe it's objective enough to determine who are the "special" players in the NBA (past or present).

Randy...who the hell is Oscar Robinson?

How can I believe even half of what you write when you can't even keep players straight?

And every where you used TD in the last statement insert Magic and tell me you honestly believe what you are saying.

So to continue your amazing logic...if Magic had gone to the Cavs (Septien years) would he have won 50+ games?  So you can elevate Magic to elite even though his team was so good.   But you can't elevate Duncan because his team is so good.  Maybe the Spurs are so good because they have one of the top players ever in the game.  Duh!

BTW your amazing ability to give compliments with a "but..." attached really detracts from the compliment.

[Randy]

Personally, I think TD belongs on the list with Magic, Bird and Russell because of HIS play

It is a great accomplishment

TD is going to go down as one of the best players to ever play in this league -- he has been incredibly consistent on both ends of the court and without him there is no way that the Spurs would have ever continued this streak.

TD is going to earn his own merit by being one of the top players to have ever played the game and he has definately made his teammates better because he makes the game easier for them, more wideopen looks because he requires a double team and so much focus from opponents defense.

Wow, if this is a dis of TD then Reality is an objective NBA fan!

I already gave props to TD -- and to the Spurs for the streak -- but you are wanting to use this streak as an indication that TD should be elevated to a very elite status.  Would TD have earned 50 wins if the weighted ping pong ball had been given to the Vancouver Grizzlies instead?  I don't think so!  And I certainly wouldn't have thought any LESS of him, as a player, if he hadn't had such a streak.  I think this has  a WHOLE lot more to do with teams rather than individuals.

So you think that Magic, Bird, Russell, and TD were more significant than Oscar Robinson, Hakeem, Wilt Chamberlain, etc?  Obviously I think Magic was one of the best (top 5) players to ever play the game.  He belongs right there with Oscar Robinson -- I certainly wouldn't put Magic above the Big O simply because Magic got the opportunity to play with better teammates. 

I'll give ALL the props in the world to the Spurs team for such an accomplishment -- but I don't think it goes to one individual.  I don't think that ANY individual wins 50+ games a year by themselves.  The Spurs as an organization deserve props for this -- the team deserves props -- the coach deserves props and then the Spurs can count themselves lucky that their main players were able to play most of the season in those years. 

If you read all of that as dissing TD, then I guess I'll just keep dissing. 

I think TD IS a special player -- but I don't believe the criteria you are putting forward here is an adequate one to show just how great a player someone is.  There are some players who are JUST as good -- perhaps even better than TD that don't fit this criteria.  I just don't believe it's objective enough to determine who are the "special" players in the NBA (past or present).

Randy...who the hell is Oscar Robinson?

How can I believe even half of what you write when you can't even keep players straight?

And every where you used TD in the last statement insert Magic and tell me you honestly believe what you are saying.

So to continue your amazing logic...if Magic had gone to the Cavs (Septien years) would he have won 50+ games?  So you can elevate Magic to elite even though his team was so good.   But you can't elevate Duncan because his team is so good.  Maybe the Spurs are so good because they have one of the top players ever in the game.  Duh!

BTW your amazing ability to give compliments with a "but..." attached really detracts from the compliment.

You know -- I'm really sorry about half of the lapses in names -- it happens a lot these days, I don't have time to post but I try anyway and I don't multitask all that well.

Actually, I thought I said just that -- Magic, just like TD, elevates himself because of his play.  I don't think Magic is special because he won 50+ games a year -- I think the Lakers were special.  I don't think TD is special because he won 50+ games a year -- I think it makes the Spurs special.  I'm not sure what is difficult to understand about that. 

I don't think you can elevate a player simply because he had the opportunity to play with great teammates.  Everyone on this planet would think that Magic was special no matter WHERE he played -- same thing with TD.  It may not have been as fun watching Magic play but he would have made his teammates better no matter where he went although he might not have won 50 games.  TD would have been as boring to watch no matter where he played -- and he would have made his teammates better because he's an incredible player.  There IS no buts about that.  TD isn't better or worse because his team won 50+ games for 10 years -- it shows that he is dominant but that he also had good teammates.

Magics 50+ for 10 years shows that he was a great player but it also shows that he had good teammates.  You can't look at the line-up that the Lakers had with Magic and recognize that Magic had a tremendous benefit by playing with some incredible players. 

I don't think any of this is a knock on TD or Magic.

I also think it's props for the Spurs as a team as well as for Pop and their management over the years.  I'm not sure where you see a diss in all of this.

I simply see it from a different perspective.  I don't see it as an individual accomplishment -- I don't think it's possible for an individual to make this kind of accomplishment.  You have to have some great teammates to make such a run happen.  Granted, the Spurs are built around TD and he is their best player (even this year when Manu has had a great year -- a lot of that is made far easier for him by the attention that TD demands) and that means he is a big part of it.

[Lurker]

So Randy then what is the criteria for calling a player elite?  Obviously from this thread I would guess your answer is being a good player who is lucky enough to get drafted to a good team.

Was Magic elite?

Was Bird elite?

Was Barkley elite?

Was Drexler elite?

Was Stockton & Malone elite?

IMO most fans move players into the elite category when they are the leaders of teams that perform consistently well.  Yes, Magic & Bird had great teams but they were the leaders.  You don't hear people say Kareem's Lakers or McHale's Celtics.  They were Magic's team and Bird's team.  It was Jordan's Bulls not Pippen's Bulls.  The team leader of a decade long winning tradition tends to move a player into that elite status.  THAT is what Duncan has accomplished.

[Randy]

Lurker -- let me ask you a question -- do you really think that winning 50+ games a season is all it takes to be an elite player in this league?  Is Worthy an elite player?  I believe that he played with Magic for those 10 seasons.  Coop probably did as well.

I DO agree with you that winning 50+ games for 10 years is a special thing -- however, do you think that there are elite players who have played in the NBA who are JUST AS GOOD as TD who never accomplished that?

I think there is a first tier and then I think there is a 2nd tier -- I think Magic, Bird, Malone, TD, Kareem, Hakeem, Jerry West, Oscar Robertson -- those guys are first tier players -- I think Drexler and Stockton were 2nd tier players. 

I don't think that I indicated that a good player is one who is lucky enough to get drafted to a good team -- I'm simply stating that TD would have been a top player even IF the Spurs hadn't gotten the collusion ping pong ball and he had gone to a bad team like the Grizzlies.  I don't know that he would have ever won a championship if he didn't have some good players around him but I DO know that he would have turned his team into a contender. 

I'm not trying to disrespect TD at all -- I'm simply stating that the 50 wins doesn't elevate him to a higher status -- he already belongs to elite status based on his ability.

[Lurker]

Lurker -- let me ask you a question -- do you really think that winning 50+ games a season is all it takes to be an elite player in this league?  Is Worthy an elite player?  I believe that he played with Magic for those 10 seasons.  Coop probably did as well.

No that is not all.  Of course all star appearances factor in.  All NBA team results are a factor.  Consistant placing among league leaders is important.  But being the LEADER of a team that is consistantly successful is another measuring stick.

Leading a team to 50+ wins for 1 year...not elite.

Leading a team to 50+ games for 3 or 4 years in a 15+ year career...better but still not elite.

Leading a team to 50+ wins every season for a decade...definately elite.

Throwing in Worthy or Cooper's name is just a smoke screen.  That would be like me saying Manu or Bowen is an elite player because he was on a team that won consistently.  The difference is who was the LEADER of those teams.  It is the leader that gets the acclaim as well as the blame.  It is leading your team to the top of the league year after year that makes the difference.

When you try to separate the elite from the superstars don't you look at overall success?  Who is more remembered - Wilt or Russell?  Bird or English?  Zeke or Mark Price?  Magic or Stockton?  Jordan or Drexler?  If you are honest you should say the player who led their team to more success.  Duncan has led the Spurs to more success (rings) in a 10 year period than any other player except Russell, Jordan & Magic.  If the Spurs win this year then he will tie Magic for 5 rings in 10 years. 

[westkoast]

I'm not trying to disrespect TD at all -- I'm simply stating that the 50 wins doesn't elevate him to a higher status -- he already belongs to elite status based on his ability.

This I would agree with.  Even if the Spurs had not cracked 50 wins in the past 2-3 seasons he would still be an elite player in this league.

I take it you guys are not really debating elite so much as HOF caliber.  I consider Dirk an elite player in this league over the past 4-5 seasons.  An ultra marshmellow soft one but still elite.  If you are a leader of a squad that consistently clears the 50 win mark I think that is when you start moving from an 'elite' player to a HOF player.

[Laker Fan]

I think Drexler and Stockton were 2nd tier players. 

Stockton was not an elite player?!?!?! Randy my boy allow me to explain something to you, not only did Stockton personify the perfect combination of skills to be the quintessential point guard, he holds 3 records that no one currently playing is even in the vicinity of breaking, all time assists, all time steals, and all time minutes. Stockton had perfect floor vision, he had perfect passing skills, he stayed healthy, and was the perfect floor general leader of the Jazz. He simply must be the point guard by which all others are judged, only Magic should be mentioned in the same breath as Stockton, in fact had Magic's career not been cut short he would have been better than Stockton, was better in all respects except Magic played little defense. Stockton may have been a dirty/sneaky player, but no way he wasn't an elite player.

I should point out here that I am in no way shape or form a John Stockton fan, Magic is and for the forseeable future will be my all time favorite player, but I am objective enough to recognize an elite player when I see one, and John Stockton was definately an elite player.

Randy your criteria is far too narrow to be realistic, you need to broaden your scope a little bit and quit being so argumentative when you are this completely unarmed, stockton not an elite player indeed!

[Lurker]

I'm not trying to disrespect TD at all -- I'm simply stating that the 50 wins doesn't elevate him to a higher status -- he already belongs to elite status based on his ability.

This I would agree with.  Even if the Spurs had not cracked 50 wins in the past 2-3 seasons he would still be an elite player in this league.

I take it you guys are not really debating elite so much as HOF caliber.  I consider Dirk an elite player in this league over the past 4-5 seasons.  An ultra marshmellow soft one but still elite.  If you are a leader of a squad that consistently clears the 50 win mark I think that is when you start moving from an 'elite' player to a HOF player.

Bottom line is strictly definitions at this point.  What is elite?  Is that different than superstar?  Is HOF a higher standard than elite?

A big part of my issue with Randy is his "X is a great player but that is a team accomplishement".  This seems to be randomly applied depending upon Randy's like/dislike for the player, team and/or poster making the claim.  In earlier discussion the Spurs support players are (paraphrazing) "only that good because Duncan commands so much attention".  But now Duncan can't be elevated to the highest level because his "team is so good".  So depending on the argument Randy needs to support his position the quality of Duncan's teammates change.

Bird is arguably the best SF ever.  And most would point to his team's success as the difference...there have been other small forwards with as good of stats. Why would most fans pick Bird over Erving as the best SF of all time?  Because when you start looking at the best of alltime then team success becomes a very big factor. Unless it involves the Spurs then Randy's blinders jump up faster than Reality can start a Kobe thread.

[Skandery]

Stockton was not an elite player?!?!?! Randy my boy allow me to explain something to you, not only did Stockton personify the perfect combination of skills to be the quintessential point guard, he holds 3 records that no one currently playing is even in the vicinity of breaking, all time assists, all time steals, and all time minutes. Stockton had perfect floor vision, he had perfect passing skills, he stayed healthy, and was the perfect floor general leader of the Jazz. He simply must be the point guard by which all others are judged, only Magic should be mentioned in the same breath as Stockton, in fact had Magic's career not been cut short he would have been better than Stockton, was better in all respects except Magic played little defense. Stockton may have been a dirty/sneaky player, but no way he wasn't an elite player.

AMEN, Brotha!!

[WayOutWest]

I think Drexler and Stockton were 2nd tier players. 

Stockton was not an elite player?!?!?! Randy my boy allow me to explain something to you, not only did Stockton personify the perfect combination of skills to be the quintessential point guard, he holds 3 records that no one currently playing is even in the vicinity of breaking, all time assists, all time steals, and all time minutes. Stockton had perfect floor vision, he had perfect passing skills, he stayed healthy, and was the perfect floor general leader of the Jazz. He simply must be the point guard by which all others are judged, only Magic should be mentioned in the same breath as Stockton, in fact had Magic's career not been cut short he would have been better than Stockton, was better in all respects except Magic played little defense. Stockton may have been a dirty/sneaky player, but no way he wasn't an elite player.

I should point out here that I am in no way shape or form a John Stockton fan, Magic is and for the forseeable future will be my all time favorite player, but I am objective enough to recognize an elite player when I see one, and John Stockton was definately an elite player.

Randy your criteria is far too narrow to be realistic, you need to broaden your scope a little bit and quit being so argumentative when you are this completely unarmed, stockton not an elite player indeed!

You had me at Stockton. 

[Laker Fan]

I think Drexler and Stockton were 2nd tier players. 

Stockton was not an elite player?!?!?! Randy my boy allow me to explain something to you, not only did Stockton personify the perfect combination of skills to be the quintessential point guard, he holds 3 records that no one currently playing is even in the vicinity of breaking, all time assists, all time steals, and all time minutes. Stockton had perfect floor vision, he had perfect passing skills, he stayed healthy, and was the perfect floor general leader of the Jazz. He simply must be the point guard by which all others are judged, only Magic should be mentioned in the same breath as Stockton, in fact had Magic's career not been cut short he would have been better than Stockton, was better in all respects except Magic played little defense. Stockton may have been a dirty/sneaky player, but no way he wasn't an elite player.

I should point out here that I am in no way shape or form a John Stockton fan, Magic is and for the forseeable future will be my all time favorite player, but I am objective enough to recognize an elite player when I see one, and John Stockton was definately an elite player.

Randy your criteria is far too narrow to be realistic, you need to broaden your scope a little bit and quit being so argumentative when you are this completely unarmed, stockton not an elite player indeed!

You had me at Stockton. 

I may be a little obtuse here WOW but I don't quite understand what you meant.