vcsgrizzfan wrote:Not that anyone would have noticed, but several rounds ago, I stopped participating in these threads. I find it absolutely moronic that Walton has not been chosen yet. It's kind of made the whole thing seem stupid to me at this point. That's it. I'm back to not posting in these threads.
This all comes down to how you define "Greatest Players of All-Time". Again....some have gone the route of accolades....some the route of stats....some the route of team accomplishment. Some give heavy weight to longevity.....others to peak performance.
Regarding Bill Walton I'll say only this:
A man who had only 123 games of peak, post-merger, NBA career is going to have trouble making this list (or any list). He may very well be one of the best players of all-time, maybe even a guy that could have been top 10.....but that didn't happen. Most of his career...."didn't happen".
HOWEVER.....the man has a regular season MVP, a Finals MVP in a different year, and another ring as a solid contributor. That is a damn good career and it's a career nobody left to choose from can boast. Unlike Grizz, I don't think that Walton not being chosen yet is a travesty, but I do think his time is coming soon. What he lacks in bulk and longevity he has made up for in accolades and peak performance against the current competition. He should go in the next 3-5 slots.
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are dumber than that.
Robceltsfan wrote:This all comes down to how you define "Greatest Players of All-Time". Again....some have gone the route of accolades....some the route of stats....some the route of team accomplishment. Some give heavy weight to longevity.....others to peak performance.
Regarding Bill Walton I'll say only this:
A man who had only 123 games of peak, post-merger, NBA career is going to have trouble making this list (or any list). He may very well be one of the best players of all-time, maybe even a guy that could have been top 10.....but that didn't happen. Most of his career...."didn't happen".
HOWEVER.....the man has a regular season MVP, a Finals MVP in a different year, and another ring as a solid contributor. That is a damn good career and it's a career nobody left to choose from can boast. Unlike Grizz, I don't think that Walton not being chosen yet is a travesty, but I do think his time is coming soon. What he lacks in bulk and longevity he has made up for in accolades and peak performance against the current competition. He should go in the next 3-5 slots.
Didn't he also play in like only 4 playoffs and had only 1 good playoffs too? Idk, i just don't see much of an argument for him. Longevity isn't huge but his small sample size doesn't favor him at all.
Walton & Iverson are the only two post-merger MVP winners still not on this list. I can understand a case for Walton because he missed a ton of games, but not understanding why even Alonzo Mourning's somehow getting more votes than Iverson, a guy who never even reached the Finals until he was a 35 year old bench-player/kidney transplant.
Robceltsfan wrote:This all comes down to how you define "Greatest Players of All-Time". Again....some have gone the route of accolades....some the route of stats....some the route of team accomplishment. Some give heavy weight to longevity.....others to peak performance.
Regarding Bill Walton I'll say only this:
A man who had only 123 games of peak, post-merger, NBA career is going to have trouble making this list (or any list). He may very well be one of the best players of all-time, maybe even a guy that could have been top 10.....but that didn't happen. Most of his career...."didn't happen".
HOWEVER.....the man has a regular season MVP, a Finals MVP in a different year, and another ring as a solid contributor. That is a damn good career and it's a career nobody left to choose from can boast. Unlike Grizz, I don't think that Walton not being chosen yet is a travesty, but I do think his time is coming soon. What he lacks in bulk and longevity he has made up for in accolades and peak performance against the current competition. He should go in the next 3-5 slots.
Didn't he also play in like only 4 playoffs and had only 1 good playoffs too? Idk, i just don't see much of an argument for him. Longevity isn't huge but his small sample size doesn't favor him at all.
Again, I think part of it is because you don't believe he was really as good as others do (Grizz, me, Rob?). Right?
Havlicekstealsit wrote:Walton & Iverson are the only two post-merger MVP winners still not on this list. I can understand a case for Walton because he missed a ton of games, but not understanding why even Alonzo Mourning's somehow getting more votes than Iverson, a guy who never even reached the Finals until he was a 35 year old bench-player/kidney transplant.
Don't forget that it's not like Mourning was some homegrown talent that helped that team develop.
He bitched his way out of TWO other cities, forcing his way there... leaving a wake of dead bodies (franchises) behind.
Havlicekstealsit wrote:Walton & Iverson are the only two post-merger MVP winners still not on this list. I can understand a case for Walton because he missed a ton of games, but not understanding why even Alonzo Mourning's somehow getting more votes than Iverson, a guy who never even reached the Finals until he was a 35 year old bench-player/kidney transplant.
Are you seriously forgetting Curry and Rose???
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are dumber than that.
Havlicekstealsit wrote:Walton & Iverson are the only two post-merger MVP winners still not on this list. I can understand a case for Walton because he missed a ton of games, but not understanding why even Alonzo Mourning's somehow getting more votes than Iverson, a guy who never even reached the Finals until he was a 35 year old bench-player/kidney transplant.
Havlicekstealsit wrote:Walton & Iverson are the only two post-merger MVP winners still not on this list. I can understand a case for Walton because he missed a ton of games, but not understanding why even Alonzo Mourning's somehow getting more votes than Iverson, a guy who never even reached the Finals until he was a 35 year old bench-player/kidney transplant.
Are you seriously forgetting Curry and Rose???
I nominate Derrick Rose....is what dwc would say.
He already did say that....like 7 rounds ago.
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are dumber than that.
Havlicekstealsit wrote:Walton & Iverson are the only two post-merger MVP winners still not on this list. I can understand a case for Walton because he missed a ton of games, but not understanding why even Alonzo Mourning's somehow getting more votes than Iverson, a guy who never even reached the Finals until he was a 35 year old bench-player/kidney transplant.
Are you seriously forgetting Curry and Rose???
Whoops. Okay, MVP winners who have completed their careers. NEither Curry nor Rose belong quite yet anyway. Rose maybe if we list a top 500.
Havlicekstealsit wrote:Walton & Iverson are the only two post-merger MVP winners still not on this list. I can understand a case for Walton because he missed a ton of games, but not understanding why even Alonzo Mourning's somehow getting more votes than Iverson, a guy who never even reached the Finals until he was a 35 year old bench-player/kidney transplant.
Are you seriously forgetting Curry and Rose???
Whoops. Okay, MVP winners who have completed their careers. NEither Curry nor Rose belong quite yet anyway. Rose maybe if we list a top 500.
Curry has almost as much of an argument at this point as Bill Walton IMO. Curry should be on the voting block in a few rounds.
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are dumber than that.
Robceltsfan wrote:This all comes down to how you define "Greatest Players of All-Time". Again....some have gone the route of accolades....some the route of stats....some the route of team accomplishment. Some give heavy weight to longevity.....others to peak performance.
Regarding Bill Walton I'll say only this:
A man who had only 123 games of peak, post-merger, NBA career is going to have trouble making this list (or any list). He may very well be one of the best players of all-time, maybe even a guy that could have been top 10.....but that didn't happen. Most of his career...."didn't happen".
HOWEVER.....the man has a regular season MVP, a Finals MVP in a different year, and another ring as a solid contributor. That is a damn good career and it's a career nobody left to choose from can boast. Unlike Grizz, I don't think that Walton not being chosen yet is a travesty, but I do think his time is coming soon. What he lacks in bulk and longevity he has made up for in accolades and peak performance against the current competition. He should go in the next 3-5 slots.
Didn't he also play in like only 4 playoffs and had only 1 good playoffs too? Idk, i just don't see much of an argument for him. Longevity isn't huge but his small sample size doesn't favor him at all.
Again, I think part of it is because you don't believe he was really as good as others do (Grizz, me, Rob?). Right?
So because he was really good that cancels out playoff success, seasons with large chunks of missed games and his short ass career, longevity, etc.? Since he's really good I think Lamarcus Aldridge should be in this discussion too then. I think he's really good.
King Deez wrote:
Didn't he also play in like only 4 playoffs and had only 1 good playoffs too? Idk, i just don't see much of an argument for him. Longevity isn't huge but his small sample size doesn't favor him at all.
Again, I think part of it is because you don't believe he was really as good as others do (Grizz, me, Rob?). Right?
So because he was really good that cancels out playoff success, seasons with large chunks of missed games and his short ass career, longevity, etc.? Since he's really good I think Lamarcus Aldridge should be in this discussion too then. I think he's really good.
I'm open to considering anyone. Show me where Lamarcus Aldridge made two 1st team All-Defenses, a league MVP, a Finals MVP.....and two rings.
Thanks.
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are dumber than that.
Havlicekstealsit wrote:Walton & Iverson are the only two post-merger MVP winners still not on this list. I can understand a case for Walton because he missed a ton of games, but not understanding why even Alonzo Mourning's somehow getting more votes than Iverson, a guy who never even reached the Finals until he was a 35 year old bench-player/kidney transplant.
Don't forget that it's not like Mourning was some homegrown talent that helped that team develop.
He bitched his way out of TWO other cities, forcing his way there... leaving a wake of dead bodies (franchises) behind.
That may be true but he was the best player for then for several years before his illness. He certainly was a better player than Iverson, imho.
