2014 Anger General Greatest of All Time #15

[ripper76]

You're an idiot... clearly I was joking, evidenced by the " " placed at the end of my sentence. As noted, when Oscar Robertson is voted #12 all-time then there is no point is taking this list serious.

And FTR... I provided a plethora of reasons for Mikan at #10, to which you had -0- retort. So get lost.

I don't get why only 1 ring and 1 MVP award is the only thing u keep focusing on.

On Straight Basketball skill, He's arguably one of the top 10 if not 5 best players to actually play in the NBA. He could damn near do it all.

So why is Russell #2 again, when he was mediocre at HALF the game?

On straight basketball skill Pippen is surely one of the 10-15 most complete / all-around players... and he's arguably the greatest perimeter Defender ever (which is half the game) with 6 Championships.

Why isn't he Top 10-15 all-time...?

Point being, there is no consistency with how posters are ranking players. One guy (Russell) is ranked #2 because of his Rings and MVP's while in Oscar's case Rings and MVP's don't matter.

That's just crazy.

There has to be a consistent criteria used equally for every player... and clearly that's not the case with most posters' voting.

This is definitely not fair and it's not a level playing field. number1lebronfan, I suggest you use your go-to move and report the board for this travesty.

[thedangerouskitchen]

I don't get why only 1 ring and 1 MVP award is the only thing u keep focusing on.

On Straight Basketball skill, He's arguably one of the top 10 if not 5 best players to actually play in the NBA. He could damn near do it all.

So why is Russell #2 again, when he was mediocre at HALF the game?

On straight basketball skill Pippen is surely one of the 10-15 most complete / all-around players... and he's arguably the greatest perimeter Defender ever (which is half the game) with 6 Championships.

Why isn't he Top 10-15 all-time...?

Point being, there is no consistency with how posters are ranking players. One guy (Russell) is ranked #2 because of his Rings and MVP's while in Oscar's case Rings and MVP's don't matter.

That's just crazy.

There has to be a consistent criteria used equally for every player... and clearly that's not the case with most posters' voting.

This is definitely not fair and it's not a level playing field. number1lebronfan, I suggest you use your go-to move and report the board for this travesty.

[thedangerouskitchen]

I don't get why only 1 ring and 1 MVP award is the only thing u keep focusing on.

On Straight Basketball skill, He's arguably one of the top 10 if not 5 best players to actually play in the NBA. He could damn near do it all.

So why is Russell #2 again, when he was mediocre at HALF the game?

On straight basketball skill Pippen is surely one of the 10-15 most complete / all-around players... and he's arguably the greatest perimeter Defender ever (which is half the game) with 6 Championships.

Why isn't he Top 10-15 all-time...?

Point being, there is no consistency with how posters ranks players. One guy (Russell) is ranked #2 because of his Rings and MVP's while in Oscar's case RIngs and MVP's don't matter.

That's just crazy.

There has to be a consistent criteria used equally for every player... and clearly that's not the case with most posters' voting.

Your acting like Ocar is being put in in the top 5 or 10 or something.

He's ranked 12 dude. Not even ranked that high.

I'm talking about the inconsistency with the way players are being ranked, not necessarily the order they're ranked per se.

...and FTR how is #12 all-time not that high? That ranking says (allegedly) only 11 players in the entire history of the game have a better resume than Oscar?

Really?

Based on what exactly...? Regular season stats?

[Y2K]

You're an idiot... clearly I was joking, evidenced by the " " placed at the end of my sentence. As noted, when Oscar Robertson is voted #12 all-time then there is no point is taking this list serious.

And FTR... I provided a plethora of reasons for Mikan at #10, to which you had -0- retort. So get lost.

I don't get why only 1 ring and 1 MVP award is the only thing u keep focusing on.

On Straight Basketball skill, He's arguably one of the top 10 if not 5 best players to actually play in the NBA. He could damn near do it all.

So why is Russell #2 again, when he was mediocre at HALF the game?

On straight basketball skill Pippen is surely one of the 10-15 most complete / all-around players... and he's arguably the greatest perimeter Defender ever (which is half the game) with 6 Championships.

Why isn't he Top 10-15 all-time...?

Point being, there is no consistency with how posters are ranking players. One guy (Russell) is ranked #2 because of his Rings and MVP's while in Oscar's case Rings and MVP's don't matter.

That's just crazy.

There has to be a consistent criteria used equally for every player... and clearly that's not the case with most posters' voting.

No one player has an identical career with another, so why would ppl use only 1 standard criteria in judging the players?

[thedangerouskitchen]

I don't get why only 1 ring and 1 MVP award is the only thing u keep focusing on.

On Straight Basketball skill, He's arguably one of the top 10 if not 5 best players to actually play in the NBA. He could damn near do it all.

So why is Russell #2 again, when he was mediocre at HALF the game?

On straight basketball skill Pippen is surely one of the 10-15 most complete / all-around players... and he's arguably the greatest perimeter Defender ever (which is half the game) with 6 Championships.

Why isn't he Top 10-15 all-time...?

Point being, there is no consistency with how posters are ranking players. One guy (Russell) is ranked #2 because of his Rings and MVP's while in Oscar's case Rings and MVP's don't matter.

That's just crazy.

There has to be a consistent criteria used equally for every player... and clearly that's not the case with most posters' voting.

No one player has an identical career with another, so why would ppl use only 1 standard criteria in judging the players?

So we can just arbitrarily cherry-pick-and-choose whatever criteria suits any given player, then use a completely different set of criteria to rank another player?

That makes no sense...

[Y2K]

So why is Russell #2 again, when he was mediocre at HALF the game?

On straight basketball skill Pippen is surely one of the 10-15 most complete / all-around players... and he's arguably the greatest perimeter Defender ever (which is half the game) with 6 Championships.

Why isn't he Top 10-15 all-time...?

Point being, there is no consistency with how posters are ranking players. One guy (Russell) is ranked #2 because of his Rings and MVP's while in Oscar's case Rings and MVP's don't matter.

That's just crazy.

There has to be a consistent criteria used equally for every player... and clearly that's not the case with most posters' voting.

No one player has an identical career with another, so why would ppl use only 1 standard criteria in judging the players?

So we can just arbitrarily cherry-pick-and-choose whatever criteria suits any given player, then use a completely different set of criteria to rank another player?

That makes no sense...

What's nonsensical with analyzing a player's strengths, weaknesses, accolades, stats and accomplishments on a player to player basis?

[LNS]

What precise criteria should be used then, tdk? If you're unhappy with the list, then explain in specific detail what guidelines we should be using to rank the GOAT players.

[Y2K]

What precise criteria should be used then, tdk? If you're unhappy with the list, then explain in specific detail what guidelines we should be using to rank the GOAT players.

Yes, inquiring minds would like to know. He complains but has yet to explain.

[thedangerouskitchen]

No one player has an identical career with another, so why would ppl use only 1 standard criteria in judging the players?

So we can just arbitrarily cherry-pick-and-choose whatever criteria suits any given player, then use a completely different set of criteria to rank another player?

That makes no sense...

What's nonsensical with analyzing a player's strengths, weaknesses, accolades, stats and accomplishments on a player to player basis?

Because certain accolades, stats and accomplishments carry more weight than others.

Again... why is Oscar ranked #12 all-time? Based on what criteria?

[Y2K]

So we can just arbitrarily cherry-pick-and-choose whatever criteria suits any given player, then use a completely different set of criteria to rank another player?

That makes no sense...

What's nonsensical with analyzing a player's strengths, weaknesses, accolades, stats and accomplishments on a player to player basis?

Because certain accolades, stats and accomplishments carry more weight than others.

Again... why is Oscar ranked #12 all-time? Based on what criteria?

It's not that simple of an answer.... and everyone judges players differently.

Why do I feel that he's #12 is going to differ from others. Me personally,

-stats
-basketball skills
-dominance in his era, especially at 6'5

He played the bulk of his career in the non free agency period. Him not having the talent around him to win more championships in his young, prime years is not something that I punish him for.

[elmouse03]

What's nonsensical with analyzing a player's strengths, weaknesses, accolades, stats and accomplishments on a player to player basis?

Because certain accolades, stats and accomplishments carry more weight than others.

Again... why is Oscar ranked #12 all-time? Based on what criteria?

It's not that simple of an answer.... and everyone judges players differently.

Why do I feel that he's #12 is going to differ from others. Me personally,

-stats
-basketball skills
-dominance in his era, especially at 6'5

He played the bulk of his career in the non free agency period. Him not having the talent around him to win more championships in his young, prime years is not something that I punish him for.

Considering that Jordan is #1 and we all know how big a fan TDK is of Jordan I really don't see why he is complaining.

Guess it's just TDK being TDK in the end.

[thedangerouskitchen]

What precise criteria should be used then, tdk? If you're unhappy with the list, then explain in specific detail what guidelines we should be using to rank the GOAT players.

Yes, inquiring minds would like to know. He complains but has yet to explain.

I look at who were BOTH the greatest winners and best players of their era, first and foremost... then I'll look at their individual dominance in a complete/all-around sense (with the Playoffs / Finals carrying far more weight than the regular season), and then I consider awards/accolades/stats "relative to peers" (keeping in perspective the fact that, for example, it was much tougher for a Center to make 1st Team NBA in the 90's than it is today... so a Center today who has 5 First Team All NBA's on his resume isn't automatically better than a Center from the 90's with just 2).

I use this (and some other) criteria to rate every player as best as possible (considering I wasn't around to watch the players from the 50's - 70's).

[thedangerouskitchen]

What's nonsensical with analyzing a player's strengths, weaknesses, accolades, stats and accomplishments on a player to player basis?

Because certain accolades, stats and accomplishments carry more weight than others.

Again... why is Oscar ranked #12 all-time? Based on what criteria?

It's not that simple of an answer.... and everyone judges players differently.

Why do I feel that he's #12 is going to differ from others. Me personally,

-stats
-basketball skills
-dominance in his era, especially at 6'5

He played the bulk of his career in the non free agency period. Him not having the talent around him to win more championships in his young, prime years is not something that I punish him for.

So using your criteria why isn't David Robinson ranked as high on your list as Oscar...? He put up eye-popping stats with supreme skills, and he played in an era where his peer competition at C was much tougher than Oscar's peer competition at G.

Not trying to give you shit, I'm only trying to illustrate why there needs to be some consistent / universally agreed upon criteria when ranking players... not some all-inclusive criteria mind you, but as a starting point at least 2-3 things that are most important.

[Y2K]

Because certain accolades, stats and accomplishments carry more weight than others.

Again... why is Oscar ranked #12 all-time? Based on what criteria?

It's not that simple of an answer.... and everyone judges players differently.

Why do I feel that he's #12 is going to differ from others. Me personally,

-stats
-basketball skills
-dominance in his era, especially at 6'5

He played the bulk of his career in the non free agency period. Him not having the talent around him to win more championships in his young, prime years is not something that I punish him for.

So using your criteria why isn't David Robinson ranked as high on your list as Oscar...? He put up eye-popping stats with supreme skills, and he played in an era where his peer competition at C was much tougher than Oscar's peer competition at G.

Not trying to give you shit, I'm only trying to illustrate why there needs to be some consistent / universally agreed upon criteria when ranking players... not some all-inclusive criteria mind you, but as a starting point at least 2-3 things that are most important.

Now go look at D-Rob's playoff stats and compare them to his regular season stats. Do the same for Oscar and then tell me what u see.

[Bush4Ever]

Defense is half of the game on a TEAM front.

But when evaluating individuals, offense is more important, because a single player can alter a team's offensive performance MUCH easier than a single player can alter a team's defensive performance.

Pippen should not sniff a top 10-15 list. He just was not prolific enough offensively (nor was he so amazingly transcendent defensively to override this factor like a Bill Russell).

[Y2K]

Defense is half of the game on a TEAM front.

But when evaluating individuals, offense is more important, because a single player can alter a team's offensive performance MUCH easier than a single player can alter a team's defensive performance.

Pippen should not sniff a top 10-15 list. He just was not prolific enough offensively (nor was he so amazingly transcendent defensively to override this factor like a Bill Russell).

It was practically unheard of for a big man to be able to defend on the perimeter in space and also be an elite rim protector at that time. He set the standard for modern defensive players and that indeed is significant.