- 36,045
- 12,024
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2012
how is longevity not relevant? If we draft dwade instead of kobe maybe we still win 3 with shaq, but by the time 08 comes around wades body is done and we only get 3 championships out of the "wade era" longevity plays huge role in basketball and life in general to say its not important shows how narrow minded you are.It can be argued thatthe differences between prime wade prime tmac and prime kobe are minimal. What sets kobe apart is he has been able to sustain his high production or "prime" for two to three times longer than the other two. Kobe was playing at a very high level before wade was drafted and he was playing at a higher level than wade was last year before he got hurt.
You cant just look at single year peak production when ranking players especially when one players prime has lasted longer than the other players career.
And thats just wade who I have great respect for as a player and see him as a clear cut #3 pg of all time
Tmac shouldnt be anywhere near those two guys. Yeah he had a few great seasons but he was constantly hurt and never lead his team past the second round. Hes a third tier sg at best and overall comparable to melo
I don't view things that way,
I always value peak production (over a players prime years) over longevity. I want to know what a player was at his best and I compare them that way,
If you like a longevity, thats you, think its irrelevant that's why its my list.
If tim duncan beats miami and wins a 5th ring my opinion of him stays the same, only interested in what they were at their best.
EDIT
Tmac is not comparable to melo.