2015 Anger General Greatest post-merger Players of All Time #3

[Master Spade]

Larry Bird

[Y2K]

No man, it's not over exaggerated. As I've stated before, it could be due to the respective position, but Magic's impact is top 5 GOAT level offensively speaking. He was the ultimate mismatch at PG, too big and strong for perimeter players while too quick and skilled for bigs. Showtime or Slowtime, there was no correct answer to bottling him up, even at age 36 and at a different position. Duncan is simply not on that level And never has been.

Duncan isn't at that level. But he's not average offensively. He's far, far above-average.

However, defensively Duncan is in that 99th percentile and Magic is *not* far, far above-average and *is* somewhat close to the average defensively.

That's all I'm saying. Duncan is closer to Magic offensively than Magic is to Duncan defensively.

No problem with this.

So now here's the deal:

What does one value most, offense or defense? And how much of each? I ask because I question just where an impactful two-way player can be trumped by a top 5 all-time impactful offensive player.

[Y2K]

It's beyond silly at this point. We're comparing Duncan and Bird and nobody can come up with a truly compelling argument as to why Duncan should be ahead of Bird (other than longevity) :

But that's kind of it.

If Duncan and Bird don't really remove themselves all that much in peak performance *and* Duncan accumulates a lot more stuff than Bird due to his longevity *and* has more rings (lead or otherwise), what is the angle for ranking Bird ahead of Duncan?

Bird does remove himself in peak performance IMO. I'd argue that 3 of the 4 best seasons between the two belong to Bird. It's season 7-12 that Bird struggles to compete with due to an abbreviated prime.

Bird definitely peaked higher. The lacking of longevity just works so heavily against him. The back, bone spurs and that he was 23 as a rookie Just takes so many years away from him.

[Y2K]

I'm going to make it official and vote Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. Peak Kareem was better than every player on the board currently and only Dream has him beat in longevity.

[kobeunderbite]

Magic

[dwcmwa]

I'm going to make it official and vote Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. Peak Kareem was better than every player on the board currently and only Dream has him beat in longevity.

Very true the Cap would easily be Number 2 on this list if you included his entire career, but since you bring up post-merger, that takes away a significant part of his success, awards and numbers.

Still no slouch of a resume at all with 2 MVP's, a Finals MVP and 5 rings past the merger with 22 and 9 on 57 percent, but I'd have Bird, Magic and yes possibly even Shaq ahead of him.

[Y2K]

I'm going to make it official and vote Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. Peak Kareem was better than every player on the board currently and only Dream has him beat in longevity.

Very true the Cap would easily be Number 2 on this list if you included his entire career, but since you bring up post-merger, that takes away a significant part of his success, awards and numbers.

Still no slouch of a resume at all with 2 MVP's, a Finals MVP and 5 rings past the merger with 22 and 9 on 57 percent, but I'd have Bird, Magic and yes possibly even Shaq ahead of him.

I don't see Cap getting picked ahead of Kobe and Shaq in the next round. He will lose out due to not having his other awards prior to 1977.

My vote is to raise awareness that:

-despite his best volume statistics being with the Bucks, his peak was right at the merger and a couple of years after it

-it's a heck of a resume despite losing 7 seasons excellent seasons

[Carpediem77]

The hick from French Lick - Larry Joe Bird

[Odogg]

Duncan over Magic!?

I thought this was the Anger General Greatest post-merger Players of All Time poll.
Not the Who can I pick that isn't a Laker

It is still Magic

I know right? Should have at least kept the voting open longer given the one vote diff.

It was open for 48 hrs. I voted for Magic Johnson with under an hour to go and that closed the gap To 1 but no one else voted.

I don't think that Duncan was a bad selection for #2 but I am a little surprised that he went before Magic...just a little.

Ultimately its my fault for not checking in sooner.

[Odogg]

One point to add.

Magic and Bird helped save the nba and propel it to the elite status it enjoys today. If Duncan never played, the nba is probably about the same today. Shouldnt influence on the sport and historical impact be factored in to an all time greatest discussion?

Also Bird and Magic each made 4 straight finals. Magic made 9 total. Duncan only once made consecutive finals. Spurs were consistent but never dominant (except 99 playoffs perhaps).

[Y2K]

One point to add.

Magic and Bird helped save the nba and propel it to the elite status it enjoys today. If Duncan never played, the nba is probably about the same today. Shouldnt influence on the sport and historical impact be factored in to an all time greatest discussion?

In my opinion, it should. If the Naismith Basketball HOF considers it as being very vital, then so should I.

[gaskill15]

I've never been a fan of the consecutive finals arguments. It seems like a cherry picked stat.

[Robceltsfan]

Well, this has been an interesting thread. It may be time to reboot a standard AG All-time top 10 because apparently Duncan should be in the 4/5 spot now (even though he wasn't last year) and all because of a first round loss in the playoffs.

[Deez]

Well, this has been an interesting thread. It may be time to reboot a standard AG All-time top 10 because apparently Duncan should be in the 4/5 spot now (even though he wasn't last year) and all because of a first round loss in the playoffs.

First Round loss > finals win when adding to your legacy. Easily top now after last years great first round loss.

[Y2K]

I've never been a fan of the consecutive finals arguments. It seems like a cherry picked stat.

I speak of winning back to back championships. It's easier to win 1 than to win consecutive. Successfully defending one's crown is definitely a plus in my book.

[AbeVigodaLive]

I've never been a fan of the consecutive finals arguments. It seems like a cherry picked stat.

I speak of winning back to back championships. It's easier to win 1 than to win consecutive. Successfully defending one's crown is definitely a plus in my book.

Is winning back-to-back more impressive than winning 2 out of 3? Why?

If anything, you're just winning with the same team against the same other teams. Never bought into that argument. Never will. Oddly enough, it's ONLY used when people are championing a specific player with back-to-back rings vs. one without a repeat... conveniently enough.

[Y2K]

Well, this has been an interesting thread. It may be time to reboot a standard AG All-time top 10 because apparently Duncan should be in the 4/5 spot now (even though he wasn't last year) and all because of a first round loss in the playoffs.

There were several Magic Johnson supporters missing in the last round. If they were here to vote, Magic wins easily. But it is what it is.

[Y2K]

I've never been a fan of the consecutive finals arguments. It seems like a cherry picked stat.

I speak of winning back to back championships. It's easier to win 1 than to win consecutive. Successfully defending one's crown is definitely a plus in my book.

Is winning back-to-back more impressive than winning 2 out of 3? Why?

If anything, you're just winning with the same team against the same other teams. Never bought into that argument. Never will. Oddly enough, it's ONLY used when people are championing a specific player with back-to-back rings vs. one without a repeat... conveniently enough.

Because defending a crown another accomplishment. And it's silly to say that is the same team beating the same teams over again. Not only is that simplistic but it's not true.

[Robceltsfan]

I think sustained greatness over a long period is far more difficult than winning back-to-backs. On that front, I'll give Duncan all the credit in the world. The run of sustained excellence that the Spurs are on is unparalleled in any sport in the modern era.

[AbeVigodaLive]

I speak of winning back to back championships. It's easier to win 1 than to win consecutive. Successfully defending one's crown is definitely a plus in my book.

Is winning back-to-back more impressive than winning 2 out of 3? Why?

If anything, you're just winning with the same team against the same other teams. Never bought into that argument. Never will. Oddly enough, it's ONLY used when people are championing a specific player with back-to-back rings vs. one without a repeat... conveniently enough.

Because defending a crown another accomplishment. And it's silly to say that is the same team beating the same teams over again. Not only is that simplistic but it's not true.

I didn't mean literally. But there's simply less turnover from one season to the very next one.