Top 10 perimeter defenders ever?

[Bartman]

Why are you so high on Russell? Just curious, not trolling. You and most of this board is too young to have ever seen him play even Grizz would have been a bit too young at the time to have a deep understanding of the game. There really isn't much footage of his games on youtube, and they aren't playing his old games on NBA tv or ESPN Classic from what I've seen. Just wondering where this passion for Russell came from.

(1) There are probably about 15-20 games worth of footage of Russell, I've seen them. It's not a ton, but you don't get into the readily available footage era until the mid 90s. Seriously, there are about 40 games in the trading community of Hakeem. Does that mean younger people coming up shouldn't become a fan of his?
(2) I helped assemble the gamelog on nbastats.net, which involved using databases like ProQuest to go through every box score and article from his career. So I've read articles on games he played from the Boston Globe, generally the away paper (a couple of teams I didn't see when I worked with them, but in the last few years they've found a number).
(3) In terms of impact data (on/off, with/without, limited game tracking), he rates very well, and I've always been an analytics-heavy guy.
(4) It's not just Russell, I rank players similar to Russell (Hakeem, Garnett, Duncan, Robinson, Wallace, Green, etc) probably higher than anybody else on here. I've always been high on longevity and defense.
(5) The game in the late 60s was closer to the early 80s than the early 80s are to today, and I still think the early 80s are high-level ball.
(6) I don't think a lot of other players from the 60s would translate well. Wilt, Baylor, Oscar, Pettit, etc probably wouldn't translate well. I think West would. Gus Johnson (a name you don't hear often) would. Cousy might.

One thing is certain, you’ve done your homework on Russell. I should probably watch more footage of the guy too but I have a hard time getting passed the competition he faced and not just at the center position. From the 80’s onward, he wouldn’t have the luxury of not facing these athletic guards and forwards like Wilkins, Dr J., Jordan, Kobe, Lebron, Vince Carter, etc. and quick and versatile guards like Kevin Johnson, Isiah Thomas, Iverson, Lillard, Stockton, Tim Hardaway, etc. Having to protect the paint against these type of players would get Russell in foul trouble a lot more than he ever was in his career causing him to adjust his game resulting in much fewer blocks and rebounds. And with so many better options on offense, his touches would be extremely limited resulting in his point production taking a severe hit. In other words, the advantages he reaped from being miles better athletically than 75% of the players during his time would pretty much erased. His analytics are skewed because of this as well so relying on them could be misleading. I know it is the same drum I keep on beating about Russell but that is road block for me each and every time I decide to rank the man. Of course you gave me much more to think about and with watching more film of the dude, maybe he will creep up on all-time list in the future. Right now I have him outside the top 10 which could change. Where do you rank Russell on your all time list?

[Bartman]

A UFC fan is obliterating the self proclaimed "AG boxing expert" ITT. How embarrassing for LNS and boxing fans on this board in general. Yikes...LMAO.

[Bush4Ever.]

Hey Bush I’ll save you the trouble and post your response for you:

“Peak 100% output vs peak 100% output would make it not very close in favor of Ali.”

Considering you are intentionally using the least charitable (and low probability) events from pre-prime (Cooper) and post-prime (Frazier) fights as central arguments as to the most likely outcomes, I think I'm on safe ground.

One would usually use actual fights from the actual period in question, or use a fight from Rocky's actual career that presented the same challenges as a peak Ali would (hint: there aren't any that even come close).

A UFC fan is obliterating the self proclaimed "AG boxing expert" ITT. How embarrassing for LNS and boxing fans on this board in general. Yikes...LMAO.

It really is bizarre, because LNS and I have basically the same understanding of Rocky and Ali's skillsets, and he is basically saying it's 50/50 and I think it would be relatively straightforward.

Then again, when a boxer defeats luminaries such as 45 year old Joe Louis and 55 year old Archie Moore, it's easy to caught up in nostalgia and mystique.

[LNS]

Oh so now Ali was post-prime at the ripe old age of 30 against Frazier?



And I never said it was 50/50. I just don’t think it’d be a whitewash in favor of Ali, and I’m correct. And how am I “caught up in nostalgia” when I’m not even a Rocky fan?



I’m pointing out facts: Rocky was undefeated, knocked out 43 of his 49 victims, and by all accounts was relentless in the ring. He’s considered one of the greatest pressure fighters/swarmers in heavyweight history.

Ali’s greatest rival in the ring was Frazier... and guess which style he used? Ever hear the expression “styles make fights”? Probably not, but actual fight fans are very familiar with it.


Edit: my mistake... Ali was 29 years old during his “post-prime” loss to Joe Frazier. Ouchie!

[LNS]

Why are you so high on Russell? Just curious, not trolling. You and most of this board is too young to have ever seen him play even Grizz would have been a bit too young at the time to have a deep understanding of the game. There really isn't much footage of his games on youtube, and they aren't playing his old games on NBA tv or ESPN Classic from what I've seen. Just wondering where this passion for Russell came from.

(1) There are probably about 15-20 games worth of footage of Russell, I've seen them. It's not a ton, but you don't get into the readily available footage era until the mid 90s. Seriously, there are about 40 games in the trading community of Hakeem. Does that mean younger people coming up shouldn't become a fan of his?
(2) I helped assemble the gamelog on nbastats.net, which involved using databases like ProQuest to go through every box score and article from his career. So I've read articles on games he played from the Boston Globe, generally the away paper (a couple of teams I didn't see when I worked with them, but in the last few years they've found a number).
(3) In terms of impact data (on/off, with/without, limited game tracking), he rates very well, and I've always been an analytics-heavy guy.
(4) It's not just Russell, I rank players similar to Russell (Hakeem, Garnett, Duncan, Robinson, Wallace, Green, etc) probably higher than anybody else on here. I've always been high on longevity and defense.
(5) The game in the late 60s was closer to the early 80s than the early 80s are to today, and I still think the early 80s are high-level ball.
(6) I don't think a lot of other players from the 60s would translate well. Wilt, Baylor, Oscar, Pettit, etc probably wouldn't translate well. I think West would. Gus Johnson (a name you don't hear often) would. Cousy might.

One thing is certain, you’ve done your homework on Russell. I should probably watch more footage of the guy too but I have a hard time getting passed the competition he faced and not just at the center position. From the 80’s onward, he wouldn’t have the luxury of not facing these athletic guards and forwards like Wilkins, Dr J., Jordan, Kobe, Lebron, Vince Carter, etc. and quick and versatile guards like Kevin Johnson, Isiah Thomas, Iverson, Lillard, Stockton, Tim Hardaway, etc. Having to protect the paint against these type of players would get Russell in foul trouble a lot more than he ever was in his career causing him to adjust his game resulting in much fewer blocks and rebounds. And with so many better options on offense, his touches would be extremely limited resulting in his point production taking a severe hit. In other words, the advantages he reaped from being miles better athletically than 75% of the players during his time would pretty much erased. His analytics are skewed because of this as well so relying on them could be misleading. I know it is the same drum I keep on beating about Russell but that is road block for me each and every time I decide to rank the man. Of course you gave me much more to think about and with watching more film of the dude, maybe he will creep up on all-time list in the future. Right now I have him outside the top 10 which could change. Where do you rank Russell on your all time list?

That’s a pretty long winded way of begging off, donctha think?

[Bush4Ever.]

Pretty much everyone acknowledges post-ban Ali was a different fighter than pre-ban, and that the best version of Ali was probably somewhere in the 1966-1967 range.

Not everyone peaks and valleys in the same way. For various reasons. A three year ban smack in the middle of his career might qualify, no?

"Holyfield beat peak Tyson...Tyson was what 30 years old lmhao"

-Literally LNS

[Bartman]

(1) There are probably about 15-20 games worth of footage of Russell, I've seen them. It's not a ton, but you don't get into the readily available footage era until the mid 90s. Seriously, there are about 40 games in the trading community of Hakeem. Does that mean younger people coming up shouldn't become a fan of his?
(2) I helped assemble the gamelog on nbastats.net, which involved using databases like ProQuest to go through every box score and article from his career. So I've read articles on games he played from the Boston Globe, generally the away paper (a couple of teams I didn't see when I worked with them, but in the last few years they've found a number).
(3) In terms of impact data (on/off, with/without, limited game tracking), he rates very well, and I've always been an analytics-heavy guy.
(4) It's not just Russell, I rank players similar to Russell (Hakeem, Garnett, Duncan, Robinson, Wallace, Green, etc) probably higher than anybody else on here. I've always been high on longevity and defense.
(5) The game in the late 60s was closer to the early 80s than the early 80s are to today, and I still think the early 80s are high-level ball.
(6) I don't think a lot of other players from the 60s would translate well. Wilt, Baylor, Oscar, Pettit, etc probably wouldn't translate well. I think West would. Gus Johnson (a name you don't hear often) would. Cousy might.

One thing is certain, you’ve done your homework on Russell. I should probably watch more footage of the guy too but I have a hard time getting passed the competition he faced and not just at the center position. From the 80’s onward, he wouldn’t have the luxury of not facing these athletic guards and forwards like Wilkins, Dr J., Jordan, Kobe, Lebron, Vince Carter, etc. and quick and versatile guards like Kevin Johnson, Isiah Thomas, Iverson, Lillard, Stockton, Tim Hardaway, etc. Having to protect the paint against these type of players would get Russell in foul trouble a lot more than he ever was in his career causing him to adjust his game resulting in much fewer blocks and rebounds. And with so many better options on offense, his touches would be extremely limited resulting in his point production taking a severe hit. In other words, the advantages he reaped from being miles better athletically than 75% of the players during his time would pretty much erased. His analytics are skewed because of this as well so relying on them could be misleading. I know it is the same drum I keep on beating about Russell but that is road block for me each and every time I decide to rank the man. Of course you gave me much more to think about and with watching more film of the dude, maybe he will creep up on all-time list in the future. Right now I have him outside the top 10 which could change. Where do you rank Russell on your all time list?

That’s a pretty long winded way of begging off, donctha think?

How is that begging off? Please explain.

[Bartman]

Pretty much everyone acknowledges post-ban Ali was a different fighter than pre-ban, and that the best version of Ali was probably somewhere in the 1966-1967 range.

Not everyone peaks and valleys in the same way. For various reasons. A three year ban smack in the middle of his career might qualify, no?

"Holyfield beat peak Tyson...Tyson was what 30 years old lmhao"

-Literally LNS

LNS has a tough time understanding context and the big picture, that's why he thinks his life is successful because he only focuses on his AG POY award, not the rest of his sad little life.

[Bush4Ever.]

LNS has a tough time understanding context and the big picture, that's why he thinks his life is successful because he only focuses on his AG POY award, not the rest of his sad little life.

I care about LNS and love him very much as a brother, but his love affair with Rocky Marciano vis-a-vis this topic can only be explained by a homosexual-based infatuation and/or psychedelic drug use.

[LNS]

Pretty much everyone acknowledges post-ban Ali was a different fighter than pre-ban, and that the best version of Ali was probably somewhere in the 1966-1967 range.

Not everyone peaks and valleys in the same way. For various reasons. A three year ban smack in the middle of his career might qualify, no?

"Holyfield beat peak Tyson...Tyson was what 30 years old lmhao"

-Literally LNS

Holyfield was actually older than Mike, had more question marks about his career due to his wars with Bowe and his loss to Moore, not to mention his supposed heart condition.

You knew none of that so you’re welcome.

[Bush4Ever.]

Holyfield was actually older than Mike, had more question marks about his career due to his wars with Bowe and his loss to Moore, not to mention his supposed heart condition.

You knew none of that so you’re welcome.

R/whoosh

Edit: The point being, there isn't a straight line between chronological age and peaks/primes, like for Mike Tyson.

[LNS]

And I love Ali but similar to Tyson his “unbeatable Godlike prime” looked much better against his level of competition at the time. Outside of Liston (who some think might’ve taken a dive... I don’t but it’s a theory that’s out there) and I guess Patterson who did “100% prime” Ali beat?

Same question for 100% prime Godlike Mike Tyson.

As soon as they faced ATG opponents they *gasp* looked human.

[Bartman]

LNS has a tough time understanding context and the big picture, that's why he thinks his life is successful because he only focuses on his AG POY award, not the rest of his sad little life.

I care about LNS and love him very much as a brother, but his love affair with Rocky Marciano vis-a-vis this topic can only be explained by a homosexual-based infatuation and/or psychedelic drug use.

[LNS]

Pretty much everyone acknowledges post-ban Ali was a different fighter than pre-ban, and that the best version of Ali was probably somewhere in the 1966-1967 range.

Not everyone peaks and valleys in the same way. For various reasons. A three year ban smack in the middle of his career might qualify, no?

"Holyfield beat peak Tyson...Tyson was what 30 years old lmhao"

-Literally LNS

LNS has a tough time understanding context and the big picture, that's why he thinks his life is successful because he only focuses on his AG POY award, not the rest of his sad little life.

Me winning the AG POY really fucked you up, huh? Leoss was furious about it too. Honestly I never give it any thought... but man it must suck knowing that the guy who bullies you on here was voted as “the best” by your peers.

[Bush4Ever.]

And I love Ali but similar to Tyson his “unbeatable Godlike prime” looked much better against his level of competition at the time. Outside of Liston (who some think might’ve taken a dive... I don’t but it’s a theory that’s out there) and I guess Patterson who did “100% prime” Ali beat?

As soon as they faced ATG opponents they *gasp* looked human.

You can examine by actually watching their movement, skills, etc...and comparing to past and future versions.

You can also examine by understanding the *degree* of dominance they exhibited relative to their competition. Not to put too fine a point on it, but *completely shutting out and dominating* "merely very good" fighters has a certain value to it.

It's absolutely 100 percent possible for the best version of a fighter to take place when he's fighting someone other than the best *name* on his resume. Because of scheduling quirks, life events, injury, or whatever else.

Tyson is actually an even better example. To the eye (mine at least), he was fairly clearly a better fighter pre-prison than post-prison...but actually fought *tougher* competition post-prison than in his peak/prime.

BJ Penn is a good MMA example. His best MMA win is Matt Hughes in 2004, an all-time great at the near-peak of his career in a heavier weight division.

But from the eye test and understanding skillsets, I'm 100 percent convinced that the BJ Penn from 2008-2009 would beat the 2004 version of himself...and because the LW division didn't have any really big names at the time...he just so happened to be fighting more traditional title contenders than an all-time great like Matt Hughes. And during that time period, I had never seen such a degree of difference between a fighter and his closest peers within-weight (BJ Penn at 155 from about 2008 to 2009). So if I had to pick a version of BJ Penn to defend the Earth Space Jam style, I would send out the 2008-2009 version without a second thought.

[Bartman]

Pretty much everyone acknowledges post-ban Ali was a different fighter than pre-ban, and that the best version of Ali was probably somewhere in the 1966-1967 range.

Not everyone peaks and valleys in the same way. For various reasons. A three year ban smack in the middle of his career might qualify, no?

"Holyfield beat peak Tyson...Tyson was what 30 years old lmhao"

-Literally LNS

LNS has a tough time understanding context and the big picture, that's why he thinks his life is successful because he only focuses on his AG POY award, not the rest of his sad little life.

Me winning the AG POY really fucked you up, huh? Leoss was furious about it too. Honestly I never give it any thought... but man it must suck knowing that the guy who bullies you on here was voted as “the best” by your peers.

LMAO...Why would anyone be envious of an award won by 3 votes by a person who bribed (i.e. sucked cock) his buddies to vote for him.

[LNS]

I didn’t even know how many votes I won by... I literally didn’t/don’t care.

But you obviously care... a lot, actually. You even have built-in excuses for my W

The board rewarded me for shitting down your throat. Either they really love me or really think you’re a fucking spazz.

I’ll let you decide that one.

[Da Stars.]

How the fuck did this thread go from the NBA to fucking boxing and MMA?

[vcsgrizzfan]

Many thinks to FPL for some great stuff in this thread. That was really enjoyable.

Not so much for the triple sided trolling of Bush, LNS and Bartman.

[Bush4Ever.]

I've done virtually no trolling in this thread, and literally did none on the basketball stuff.

About the only trolling I did was when I pointed out LNS literally said Rocky would beat Ali "and it wouldn't even be close".

Which is a strange opinion, frankly.