NBA Playoffs | Page 30 | Syracusefan.com

NBA Playoffs

OrangeDW said:
I don't agree with this, unless you're focusing on mostly scoring. Lebron is a better scorer, and Magic sacrificed his scoring a bit as he could've scored more. But as an overall offensive player? It's very close. 27 and 7 vs. 19 and 11 or so? Magic's FG% was slightly better, but it was also a different era. I lean towards Magic.

As for Lebron passing Magic and/or Bird, I think that depends on how you balance rating them at their peaks and rating their longevity and overall body of work. Some people weigh those factors a little differently, which changes how they look at it.

A good example might be Barkley vs. Malone. If you value longevity more highly than others, you're definitely going Malone. If you focus more on the peak, you might go Barkley(or maybe not...there's a good argument to be made for either in that case).
Expand...
Magic ran the fast break better than any PG of alltime. I think he is a better passer than Lebron. His shooting was solid but Magic couldn't get to the rim like Lebron can. Magic developed the post game and sky hook during his career. Lebron has improved posting up. If you want to slice it thinner I meant Lebron is the better scorer. Magic never looked for his points they were always within the game. Lebron gets his points no matter what.
 
Knicks411 said:
I would not have guessed that, I would have thought the transition happened closer to the 85-86 period. Interesting that in both 82 and 83 Kareem finished 10th in the MVP. He averaged about 22-8 on 62% true shooting. Though you can see the rebounds were down, 8.5 rebounds per 36 for a 7 footer in that era (fast pace) is pretty bad.

Magic's MVP voting the last 9 years of his career is pretty insane
3, 3, 2, 3, 1, 3, 1, 1, 2. Kareem had a 12 year run where he went 3, 1, 1, 2, 1, 5, 1, 1, 4, 4, 1, 3.




Can't argue that.
Expand...
The press loved Magic, did not like Kareem.
 
Cusefan0307 said:
It's interesting argument for sure. Bird averaged 24, 10, 6 and almost 2 steals. Lebron averages 25, 7, 7, and 2. You can make an argument that Bird is the one guy hurt by his era. He didn't shoot nearly enough threes for how good a shooter he was. He also didn't start until 23 and came in and immediately produced. Lebron had four extra years in him giving him slightly better stats.
Expand...

Most of you guys are probably too young to have seen Oscar Robertson play but he's always been underrated. He was Lebron before Lebron.

Career 25.7ppg, 9.5apg, 7.5rpg. Had one season where he averaged a triple double and almost did it his rookie season, missing by .3apg.
 
OrangeDW said:
I don't agree with this, unless you're focusing on mostly scoring. Lebron is a better scorer, and Magic sacrificed his scoring a bit as he could've scored more. But as an overall offensive player? It's very close. 27 and 7 vs. 19 and 11 or so? Magic's FG% was slightly better, but it was also a different era. I lean towards Magic.

As for Lebron passing Magic and/or Bird, I think that depends on how you balance rating them at their peaks and rating their longevity and overall body of work. Some people weigh those factors a little differently, which changes how they look at it.

A good example might be Barkley vs. Malone. If you value longevity more highly than others, you're definitely going Malone. If you focus more on the peak, you might go Barkley(or maybe not...there's a good argument to be made for either in that case).
Expand...

I would put Malone well ahead of Barkely, the argument for me is Malone vs Duncan.
 
Briancuse said:
I would put Malone well ahead of Barkely, the argument for me is Malone vs Duncan.
Expand...

Duncan is clearly better. He was a defensive anchor throughout his career. Malone didn't have nearly the defensive game Duncan did.
 
OrangeDW said:
I don't agree with this, unless you're focusing on mostly scoring. Lebron is a better scorer, and Magic sacrificed his scoring a bit as he could've scored more. But as an overall offensive player? It's very close. 27 and 7 vs. 19 and 11 or so? Magic's FG% was slightly better, but it was also a different era. I lean towards Magic. .
Expand...

Magic also played in an era with more possessions. Basketball reference scales stats to per 100 possessions, so this helps for comparison.

Magic's best offensive year was probably 87, he averaged 31 points and 16 assists per 100 possessions, with a 60% true shooting. Lebron's best year I guess was 2009? 41 points and 10 assists per 100 possessions, right at 60% true shooting.

One thing I'll say is that Magic was more efficient than I thought; even without shooting 3's. Magic was right at 60% true shooting for his career. Of course this gets back to what i said before, all these guys are legends of the sport for a reason. I might go Magic purely offensively.
 
rrlbees said:
Most of you guys are probably too young to have seen Oscar Robertson play but he's always been underrated. He was Lebron before Lebron.

Career 25.7ppg, 9.5apg, 7.5rpg. Had one season where he averaged a triple double and almost did it his rookie season, missing by .3apg.
Expand...

I feel like Oscar is always the one that gets lost in these discussions.
 
OrangeDW said:
From like 88-93, I'd say Barkley was a top 3 player in the game. Malone definitely excelled for longer though.
Expand...

The biggest thing the '92 Dream Team showed was that outside of Michael, Barkley and Pippen were the next two best players on the team.
 
Barkley vs. Malone is a legit debate. Duncan is by far better than both of them.
Malone stayed in shape and got better in the mid 90's while Barkley partied and didn't stay in the shape. Barkley was better from 1985-93 and then Malone stayed close to his prime if not better while Barkley fell down.

1993 Phoenix Suns should have won the NBA title. They went 0-3 at home in the Finals. Go and watch the last 2 minutes of Game 6 it is probably the most underrated or forgotten choke of alltime.

Utah filled a void of the West being down. Utah's best players got closer to a title when they were older and not in the primes. That tells you the rest of the conference wasn't good enough. Utah 1992 team that lost in the WCF to Portland was a better team than the 1997 or 1998 teams that reached the Finals. Because Malone and Stockton were 5 years younger.

I would take Barkley over Malone in their primes but Malone's resume from 1994 thru 2004 makes him the player with the better resume.
 
Cusefan0307 said:
Duncan is clearly better. He was a defensive anchor throughout his career. Malone didn't have nearly the defensive game Duncan did.
Expand...

I would agree with Duncan over Malone.

I would put Shaq and Hakeem slightly over Duncan though.
 
OrangeDW said:
I would agree with Duncan over Malone.

I would put Shaq and Hakeem slightly over Duncan though.
Expand...

Man that is a tough one.

The Shaq-Duncan debate is a big peak-career value one. As great as Duncan was, I don't think anyone would deny (would they?) that Shaq at his best was better than Duncan at his best. But Duncan was at his best for much longer than Shaq was, and Duncan at his best is still incredible. I would lean to Duncan over Shaq Duncan has basically been great for 20 years, and has anchored a contender that entire time, while Shaq anchored a contender for more like half that time.
 
Knicks411 said:
Man that is a tough one.

The Shaq-Duncan debate is a big peak-career value one. As great as Duncan was, I don't think anyone would deny (would they?) that Shaq at his best was better than Duncan at his best. But Duncan was at his best for much longer than Shaq was, and Duncan at his best is still incredible. I would lean to Duncan over Shaq Duncan has basically been great for 20 years, and has anchored a contender that entire time, while Shaq anchored a contender for more like half that time.
Expand...

Well put
 
rrlbees said:
Most of you guys are probably too young to have seen Oscar Robertson play but he's always been underrated. He was Lebron before Lebron.

Career 25.7ppg, 9.5apg, 7.5rpg. Had one season where he averaged a triple double and almost did it his rookie season, missing by .3apg.
Expand...
I don't remember where you stand, if you stand at all...on the Mike Francesa thread, but he ALWAYS brings up the Big O when discussing the greatest NBA players ever.

the amazing thing is, basically every caller never says him, and he uses him to throw someone out of the callers Mt Rushmore or whatever they were debating.
 
Last edited:
MikeSU02 said:
I feel like Oscar is always the one that gets lost in these discussions.
Expand...
That's because you have to be an octogenarian like me to have seen him play and to appreciate his greatness, particularly in the context of days of yore, in-between and now.

I became a sports fan just as the Rochester Royals were packin' up and headed for Ohio, I got my first taste of The Association in the late '50s on Saturday afternoon network games and a Nats exhibition (Dolph was in full effect) here in Rochester.

It was game on when the Big O led the nation in scoring three freakin' years in a row at Cincinnati and took them to two consecutive Final Fours. This 11-year-old was hooked on hoops when Oscar and Jerry West captained the great 1960 Olympic "dream team" and then went to the NBA while I fell in love with Wilt (he and LeBron, only 2 players, along with the Say Hey Kid, I have passionately pulled for, regardless of the team), and went to college to become a sportswriter.

A month or so into my first gig after graduation, the Akron Beacon Urinal, my editor -- who grew up down the road from Cabin Creek, but he was no Zeke -- asked me to drive to the Cleveland Arena and cover an exhibition between two new NBA teams, the Cavs and Buffalo Braves. Lot more Cavs, Knicks, all that great stuff and, ladies and germs, I stand before you today a full-fledged NBA junkie,and I ain't ever gonna go to Betty Ford for this addiction.

Bottom line, Big O's problem in the big picture of all-timers is he played so long ago, but when I think of players from the '60s and '70s whose skills were so profound and advanced that they could play today, I immediately think of four guys -- Oscar, The Logo, Wilt and Russell -- Bill, not Cazzie.
NBA.com: Olympic feats by 1960 team still worth marveling today
 
KaiserUEO said:
I don't remember where you stand, if you stand at all...on the Mike Francesa thread, but he ALWAYS brings up the Big O when discussing the greatest NBA players ever.

the amazing thing is basically every caller never says him, and he uses him to throw someone out of the callers Mt Rushmore or whatever they were debating.
Expand...

Didn't participate in that thread. I don't have a strong opinion of Francesa one way or another simply because I don't listen to it but did on occasion in the past. But if he loved the Big O, I agree with him on that.
 
Isn't Oscar's big problem just that he didn't win a lot? Not knocking him for it, but he didn't win a ring until close to the end of his career and he never even made the finals until the Bucks run
 
Oscar Robertson was really well chronicled in Bill Simmons excellently written NBA book.

He was a great player but not a great teammate and played in an ERA of awful shooting and high possessions. The awful shooting and high possessions helped account for his stats of a season averaging a triple double.
Magic's 1981-82 season of 18.6 PPG, 9.6 RPG, 9.5 APG are IMO more impressive because of the 1980s competition and better shooting overall in the league than Oscar's triple double season.

Oscar was a great player an all time top 10 guy but his attitude and only 1 title don't put him in the league of Magic/Jordan/Kobe/Lebron for me. Oscar vs. Jerry West is the debate IMO.
 
Knicks411 said:
Man that is a tough one.

The Shaq-Duncan debate is a big peak-career value one. As great as Duncan was, I don't think anyone would deny (would they?) that Shaq at his best was better than Duncan at his best. But Duncan was at his best for much longer than Shaq was, and Duncan at his best is still incredible. I would lean to Duncan over Shaq Duncan has basically been great for 20 years, and has anchored a contender that entire time, while Shaq anchored a contender for more like half that time.
Expand...
Shaq underachieved. For Duncan to have 5 titles and Shaq to only have 4 is proof enough for me Duncan had a better career.
Duncan is a PF though and Shaq was a C.

Shaq leaving Orlando for LA IMO cost him atleast 1 title. Orlando could have beaten Chicago in 1998 IMO those Bulls were fried. Penny and Shaq wouldn't have been like Kobe and Shaq because Shaq was clearly the more important player while Kobe by 2002 was Shaq's equal. Shaq definitely left potential on the table while Duncan has not. Also, Duncan has to be close to 40 while playing 4 years of college ball. Duncan left money on the table staying in college but he may have saved some wear on his legs playing those fewer game schedules as a young kid. Lebron is going break down earlier than Duncan because he entered the league 4 years younger and has played all these games.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Bayside44
    • Like
Just got back from Cap One...
2 3 4
Replies
84
Views
6K
CuseFan
C
cliftonparksufan
    • Like
OT: Womens hoop took center stage today.
Replies
12
Views
926
MikeSU02
MikeSU02
Cusedad2X
    • Like
Any LBs on the horizon???
Replies
3
Views
827
cuseallday
cuseallday
OrlandoCuse
    • Dislike
    • Like
    • Haha
  • Locked
Red Season 1 Now a Bust
24 25 26
Replies
641
Views
43K
tee1222
tee1222
sutomcat
    • Like
    • Love
My Take
Replies
21
Views
2K
CardiacCuse
CardiacCuse

Forum statistics

Threads
167,733
Messages
4,723,474
Members
5,917
Latest member
FbBarbie

Share this page

Online statistics

Members online
89
Guests online
2,201
Total visitors
2,290
Totals may include hidden visitors.


Top Bottom