Top five greatest basketball players ever

[Knicks411]

That's fair. I guess he's a lot like Chris Paul in the fact that he had a hard time breaking through in the playoffs, especially in a time when the West wasn't that great outside of the Lakers. His teams did lose in the first round 9 times, including 5 times when they won 50 plus games. Those Jazz had a hard time with Hakeem's Rockets and the Payton/Kemp Sonics. I

9 first round losses is pretty crazy; the 3 from 01-03 I'm pretty much willing to throw out because both he and Stockton were clearly on the downside. Unlike Paul though, you can at least offset it with 5 trips to the conf finals, along with the 2 finals trips.

Couldn't have said it better myself. Karl Malone wasn't just a scorer - he was a dominant rebounder and passed it pretty well also - especially later in his career (more assists than Jordan in 97 and 98).

The level of consistency both he and Stockton (another underrated player imo) had is incredible.

I make this post every 6 months or so, so I won't go into the details, but the durability of Malone and Stockton is incredible to see.

 

[Alsacs]

Malone was a two time MVP; even if the 97 one should have gone to MJ (which it should have), to me a compiler is someone who was good for a long time and has stats that make him look great. Malone made first team all league 11 times (jesus, I had no idea it was that many); he was considered one of the best players in the league for a decade. He was top 5 in MVP voting 9 times. Pierce never made first team all league, never was top 5 in MVP voting.

I also think you are short changing the Jazz when Malone was there; they never finished below 500 in his entire career there. They were 42-40 in his rookie year, 44-38 his second year, and basically won 47 games or more (usually way more) every year he was there. I think you're way off on Malone.

Both of Malone's MVP were a joke. 1997 MJ was the MVP and in 1999 it was a 50 game regular season where most of the league came into the season out of shape. Malone always stayed in shape.

I would say Malone is above Pierce but Malone is barely top 20.

 

[Eric15]

9 first round losses is pretty crazy;

Glass-half full perspective: a first round playoff loss was the bottom of the barrel for those Jazz teams.

 

[Eric15]

Both of Malone's MVP were a joke. 1997 MJ was the MVP and in 1999 it was a 50 game regular season where most of the league came into the season out of shape. Malone always stayed in shape.

I would say Malone is above Pierce but Malone is barely top 20.

I agree with you that voters suffered from Jordan MVP voting fatigue re: 1997. But how can you knock the guy for being a professional in 1999?

The name Paul Pierce honestly shouldn't even appear in this thread.

 

[RF2044]

9 first round losses is pretty crazy;

Alternative perspective: they made the playoffs those 9 times, and those were the low points of the Malone / Stockton era.

 

[Cusefan0307]

Glass-half full perspective: a first round playoff loss was the bottom of the barrel for those Jazz teams.

They definately were the most consistent team in the NBA for a twenty plus year period. Their best chance to win was in 94 and 95 when Jordan retired, but they couldn't get past Houston. Olajuwon dominated them. Scored 35 a game in the 94-95 matchup when the Jazz won 60 games.

 

[br801]

I don't disagree with what you say about Magic, but his shooting wasn't as good as Lebrons. It's not like I disrespected Magic, still have him as a top 5 of all time.

Neither were/are great pure shooters, but both have been very efficient scorers. Magic was at about 52% from the field for his career, better than LeBron's career number because he shot fewer 3-pointers; both are at around 54% on 2-pointers. Magic was a far superior free throw shooter.

 

[Knicks411]

Alternative perspective: they made the playoffs those 9 times, and those were the low points of the Malone / Stockton era.

Absolutely, good point that I see multiple people made. It still "seems" like a lot to me with 2 hall of famers. I'm not trying to kill the guy for it, I just wouldn't have thought they lost that many times in round 1.

I'm always fascinated by the teams in sports that are really really good for a long time but never seem to break through. The Jazz did end up making the finals twice, but never won a ring. Teams like the mid 80's bucks, Cavs in the early 90's, i guess you can throw in the Thunder right now, mid 90's Sonics with the exception of 96.

 

[RF2044]

Absolutely, good point that I see multiple people made. It still "seems" like a lot to me with 2 hall of famers. I'm not trying to kill the guy for it, I just wouldn't have thought they lost that many times in round 1.

I'm always fascinated by the teams in sports that are really really good for a long time but never seem to break through. The Jazz did end up making the finals twice, but never won a ring. Teams like the mid 80's bucks, Cavs in the early 90's, i guess you can throw in the Thunder right now, mid 90's Sonics with the exception of 96.

No doubt--makes it difficult to assess the context of greatness, when players have consistent periods of longevity during which they amass staggering numbers.

 

[NineOneSeven]

Absolutely, good point that I see multiple people made. It still "seems" like a lot to me with 2 hall of famers. I'm not trying to kill the guy for it, I just wouldn't have thought they lost that many times in round 1.

I'm always fascinated by the teams in sports that are really really good for a long time but never seem to break through. The Jazz did end up making the finals twice, but never won a ring. Teams like the mid 80's bucks, Cavs in the early 90's, i guess you can throw in the Thunder right now, mid 90's Sonics with the exception of 96.

Throw in LAC too. They'll continue to win 50+ for the next couple of years too, if they keep their core.

 

[Eric15]

The amount of attention Paul Pierce has gotten in a thread about the top five greatest players ever is interesting. It would be like if there was a thread about the top five greatest SU players ever, and then there was a bunch of discussion about Damone Brown.

 

[Cusefan0307]

The amount of attention Paul Pierce has gotten in a thread about the top five greatest players ever is interesting. It would be like if there was a thread about the top five greatest SU players ever, and then there was a bunch of discussion about Damone Brown.

I was referring to players once people started speaking to the top 20, not sure who mentioned him in the top 5. Heck, he might not even be a top 5 Celtic...

 

[Alsacs]

I agree with you that voters suffered from Jordan MVP voting fatigue re: 1997. But how can you knock the guy for being a professional in 1999?

The name Paul Pierce honestly shouldn't even appear in this thread.

That 50 game season was a joke. There was no uniformity in the schedule and Malone was so valuable he led the Jazz 37-13 record and 2nd round flameout. Tim Duncan got reversed MJ in 1999. Nobody wanted to give a 2nd year guy the MVP.

I think ore people would rather have Paul Pierce's top 40 career over Karl Malone's top 20 career. Won a ring, made a lot of money, 2nd best SF of the 2000s. Malone has stats and Utah fans.

 

[Alsacs]

I was referring to players once people started speaking to the top 20, not sure who mentioned him in the top 5. Heck, he might not even be a top 5 Celtic...

He makes the Celtics top 5 for sure. He passed Havlicek for the alltime leading scorer in Boston history.
1. Russell
2. Bird
3. Havlicek
4. Pierce
5. Cowins

 

[Knicks411]

Throw in LAC too. They'll continue to win 50+ for the next couple of years too, if they keep their core.

Now that I think about it, that's the team I was thinking of a few weeks ago that made me look up some of those other teams I mentioned. They've won 55 or so the last 5 years and they're set up to keep doing that.

 

[SoBeCuse]

I'm a LeBron hater so I will abstain from ranking my top 5. No mention of Bird is a little surprising though, given how well the stats stack up. I honestly can't stand LeBron's personality and tend to yawn when I watch him play, so my bias would not let me put him in the top 5.

 

[NineOneSeven]

The amount of attention Paul Pierce has gotten in a thread about the top five greatest players ever is interesting. It would be like if there was a thread about the top five greatest SU players ever, and then there was a bunch of discussion about Damone Brown.

Give me your top 15 players who had 5 quality years post 2000.

 

[Eric15]

Give me your top 15 players who had 5 quality years post 2000.

I would have Pierce on that list. (is that what you're asking?)

 

[NineOneSeven]

Another player whose career was hindered by injury- Jermaine O'Neal. At his prime, 20 and 10 and an elite defender. To a lesser extent, the forgotten Antonio McDyess. He could have been an elite offensive player if not for brutal injuries right in his prime.

 

[orangenirvana]

Both of Malone's MVP were a joke. 1997 MJ was the MVP and in 1999 it was a 50 game regular season where most of the league came into the season out of shape. Malone always stayed in shape.

I would say Malone is above Pierce but Malone is barely top 20.

Malone should have won MVP in 1998 (led the league in both PER and Win Shares). So even if he didn't deserve the one in 97 - the next season was a make-up.

Silly to think he's "barely Top 20" and mention him in the same sentence as Paul Pierce. He's the greatest power forward of all-time.

 

[Alsacs]

Malone should have won MVP in 1998 (led the league in both PER and Win Shares). So even if he didn't deserve the one in 97 - the next season was a make-up.

Silly to think he's "barely Top 20" and mention him in the same sentence as Paul Pierce. He's the greatest power forward of all-time.

Tim Duncan is a PF and better. Elgin Baylor was better. Malone never won his conference until the whole thing self-destructed. Malone is in the low teens all time for me.

 

[Knicks411]

Tim Duncan is a PF and better. Elgin Baylor was better. Malone never won his conference until the whole thing self-destructed. Malone is in the low teens all time for me.

Whats the argument for Duncan being a PF? I'm not sure it really matters, but just curious.

I think you're relying too much on the Simmons argument; I don't think it matters when the Jazz won the west.

 

[721Comstock]

Malone should have won MVP in 1998 (led the league in both PER and Win Shares). So even if he didn't deserve the one in 97 - the next season was a make-up.

Silly to think he's "barely Top 20" and mention him in the same sentence as Paul Pierce. He's the greatest power forward of all-time.

Timmay Dunkin would be to differ.

 

[Alsacs]

Whats the argument for Duncan being a PF? I'm not sure it really matters, but just curious.

I think you're relying too much on the Simmons argument; I don't think it matters when the Jazz won the west.

Tim Duncan has had a C start next next to him most of his career. Now has he played the 5 like Draymond Green has for GS yes but his natural position has been the PF spot.

Duncan was not a natural center if you want to call him one then its fine but I think he was more of a natural PF.
Splitter/Robinson and I am missing a big have been the Cs he has played next too.

 

[br801]

Tim Duncan is a PF and better. Elgin Baylor was better. Malone never won his conference until the whole thing self-destructed. Malone is in the low teens all time for me.

Baylor was the prototype of the modern small forward and never really played much power forward. He was a great leaper and rebounder, and was about 6'5".