ESPN chooses their Top 10 Greatest Shooting Guards of all time

[shuges]

Originally Posted by DOWNTOWN43

if you think its funny that i used Kobe, i'm not d-riding. i just used him because he's come the closest to 100 since Wilt.

Nah. Not laughing at you using Mamba. Just laughing at you saying Phil would actually sit him.

I remember there was a big issue during the 62 in 3.

Same with 81. Game was well in hand by the time he scored those final points.

Originally Posted by Roscoe P Wallace

This thread is absolutely spiraling out of control

. Top 10 shooting guards all time thread has now become the "Who was the 1962-63 NY Knicks 3rd string center Vol: Was he OVER 6'6"?" Thread.

Good thread though. Everyone bringing some solid points. This is the way S&T used to be. But since we don't have any "footage" or"archives", I can't prove it.

Just messin.

 

[true 3 blue]

yea, solid thread. watch how quickly the sports forum will do an about face though

 

[scottsauce88]

Good thread though. Everyone bringing some solid points. This is the way S&T used to be. But since we don't have any "footage" or "archives", I can't prove it.

Just messin.
but you were there so you have a good indicator

And btw, it was probably worse before, especially in 03 when the Kobe rape case was going on. Zodogg and Fresh were running wild

 

[sohi 23]

Originally Posted by BullsRepeat3Peat

http://sohi-23.u.yuku.com/

SoHi 23

http://sohi-23.u.yuku.com/

 

[willinc]

they got number 1 right,

flip 2 and 3, the rest i dont really care about


http://24-K-B-8.u.yuku.com

 

[frank 7he t4nk]

Here's a pretty entertaining website for those who think Kobe is better Jordan.

http://kb24overrated.com/homehttp://http://kb24overrated.com/home

I found the site after reading some comments on the ESPN page about the Greatest Guards.

 

[darthska]

When Kobe got 81, it was a close game throughout, so the idea that Phil would bench Kobe if he was gunning for a record during a Laker blowout is not true inthe case of the 81 points.

And it should also be mentioned that Kobe had 64 (or 65) against the Mavs... through 3 quarters. Now that WAS a blowout, and Kobe didn't play the 4thquarter, so that kind of adds to the argument that Phil would rest him before he got a chance to get a huge number in the midst of a blowout.

I also wanted to mention something else that has been brought up about Wilt's 100 compared to Kobe's 81: teammates deferring. I have the game on DVD,and the lakers were definitely deferring to Kobe. Granted, most of the team was stone cold in the first half and Kobe was red hot, but still, it wasn'tlike everyone took turns taking shots and Kobe just happened to be hitting his. He blew UP in the 3rd quarter, and in the 4th, every Laker was almost forcingways to find Kobe.

me:

---

Whoever you think of, Jordan averaged more points per game than the person you think of.

true 3 blue:

---

WRONG [table][tr][td]1. Michael Jordan[/td] [td]1,072[/td] [td]12,192[/td] [td]7,327[/td] [td]32,292[/td] [td]30.1[/td] [/tr][tr][td]1. Wilt Chamberlain[/td] [td]1,045[/td] [td]12,681[/td] [td]6,057[/td] [td]31,419[/td] [td]30.1[/td] [/tr][/table]

BullsRepeat3Peat:

---

[table][tr][td]1.[/td] [td]Michael Jordan[/td] [td]30.12[/td] [/tr][tr][td]2.[/td] [td]Wilt Chamberlain*[/td] [td]30.07[/td] [/tr][/table]
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/pts_per_g_career.html

true 3 blue:

---

u gotta be kidding me



I mean... 'more' is 'more', no? Even a marginal difference... is a difference.

If I have $30.12 and you have $30.07, don't I have more than you?

---

And now I'm going to go back and clean this thread up a bit. Nothing major, just deleting a few replies, including some of the trash I've contributedto the thread.

 

[jacksonvillenc]

If Kobe is not in your top 3 you dont know basketball !!!

 

[5am6oody72]

I also wanted to mention something else that has been brought up about Wilt's 100 compared to Kobe's 81: teammates deferring.


I could be wrong and I can't prove it since there's no footage, but I'm pretty sure I remember hearing that Wilt's teammates deferred to him acrazy amount as well. After all, he put up 60-something shots compared to Kobe's 46.

 

[gangsta207therevolution]

I thought it was common knowledge that Kobe was the second best SG ever?

To me playing with the best SF ever (Baylor)> playing with the 4th best center (shaq)

Any team that had Pistol Pete as a main cog would not sniff a title

Your CRAZY SKA for taking Iverson over Bryant too.

2000-2001 was the exception to the rule as far as Iverson being a legit winner.

Iverson is a combo guard who cant defend. You bring up that you would take Bean over any guard Small foward not named Michael Jordan for one game but You sayKobe isnt above Iverson and West on a list of best SG's.

Thats pretty much loon satus, What about Kobe scares you?

He isnt the average basketball player, his personality isnt one thats great for a team situation. We knew that when he was drafted. Its just not going tohappen with Kobe. He is nice but he perfers to be in his own mind. He aint a rah rah dude.

When you look at if objectively its clear Kobe has the second best resume on this list.
Ska I respect you based on everything I know (not a whole lot) but taking 2 combo guards over a top 15 player ever as we speak and the best player in the worldtoday is CRAZY.



Now that Im done with that Mike Thompson shouldnt be on this list they really got the list as correct as possible. Dumars aint a top 15 SG and shouldnt be inthe Hall but thats for another day.
If you look at it from a stat level than DWade is only lacking years playing at the 25 6 6 level otherwise he would be top 10.
Aint no way in hell hes one of the top 13 SG's I have seen but them dudes wernt as consistant even as Wade.

 

[scottsauce88]

I think you've sidetracked the entire argument here, people are comparing what West did in his era (relative to basketball and other players in that era) to what Kobe is doing now (relative to basketball and other players now).

Some think West was better in his era, than Kobe is in his.
how have I changed my argument? Here is a quote from like three pages back:

yes, but to say with absolutely certainty that a player is as good or better than another without actually seeing one of them play is just as ridiculous. Im sorry Ska, but you werent even born when West RETIRED, so I dont see how you can say you give West this and this player he will win just as much as Kobe. Im not arguing one or the other because I havent seen West play, all I have is media articles and hoopedia stats and bios. I dont know what West's strengths are since I have never seen him in person. To know someones weaknesses you have to actually see someone play to see why that is a weakness.
it was in reply to this quote by ska:

I would take West, Maravich, and Iverson over Kobe.

Any day.

All day.

Every time you ask me.

Give Maravich, Iverson, or West the EXACT career Kobe has had... playing with one of the league's top 5 centers ever for like 8 years ('96-'97 to '03-'04, right?) and one of the top 3 coaches of all time, and they would at LEAST do what Kobe has done; I think they would do better, though.
so what is this saying, Give Maravich, Iverson, or West Shaq and they would do the same thing Kobe did, but he thinks better. So to break it downmore, if West were playing today, he would be able to do everything Kobe did and better. Even further West in his prime today>Kobe.

I havent sidetracked my argument at all, you just keep taking crap out of context and running with it. Hell here is a quote from 4 pages later:

Once again, I have not ONE, not a single god damn time questioned his greatness, I just said it is damn hard to say one person is better than another when they haven't seen one player play.

even further:

show me once where I have said that Jerry West wasn't a great player. The entire time Ive argued, all I have stated is in order to clear-cut say one player is greater than another, you should at least see that player on a consistent basis, but not one time have I said that West isn't good or he doesn't belong in the top 10.
how bout more?

no, im not saying that at all. In fact I havent seen all of the Lakers games this year so I wouldnt expect you to see all of his. All im saying is this. When you watch clips of great players on ESPN classic they are probably on there for a certain reason, because they most likely had an amazing game. So if you watch 5 clips of the same player who had amazing games, wouldnt you just assume their whole career is like that?

All im saying is in order to say one person is greater than another you should have at least seen that player play on a consistent basis. A consistent basis doesn't mean every game, it just means seeing their UPS and their DOWNS
I've reiterated my argument at probably ten times, you just choose to take one quote and run with it.

But, I have watched both Ginobili and Carroll play, I've even seen Carroll play a hell of a lot more than I've seen Ginobili and I still know Manu Ginobili is a better basketball player than Matt Carroll. (A comparison between two players I don't watch consistently; something that you claim is impossible).
here we go again. I said it was damn near impossible because of West's time. It is a hell of a lot easier to watch TWO players who PLAY INTHE LEAGUE TODAY, than to get footage of a dude who played in the damn 60's and 70's. If you think it is so easy, then get me some %#+@*%* footage ofJerry West that is more than a two minute long highlight. You can't, all you can do is refer to games shown on ESPN classic that most likely are going toshow the logo playing out of his damn mind.

Its not me that is sidetracking arguments, its you

 

[imsolesick]

#1 is point

. the rest i dont care.

 

[darthska]

Like watching a player play a game LIVE is the only way to have watched them play the game.

Scottsauce88:

---

have you seen West play anywhere?

You mean to tell me that you think we have video footage of Kennedy being assassinated in 1963 and Elvis in movies in the 50s... but that somehow,no one managed to tape any basketball games?

Of course I've seen West play. And no, I'm not talking about little 2 second clips in highlights where he steals a ball and throws it from the otherside of the court to score and win a game. He went to West Virginia University, which isn't too far of a drive from where I live. You think they don'thave archived video of him? You think I haven't given them a visit to research things at their library, and that it didn't cross my mind to check outthe OG Mr. Basketball while I was at his alma mater?

 

[thekillerj23]

Originally Posted by FLINTGREY

List looks pretty accurate to me.

i just don't know about joe dumars on the list

 

[scottsauce88]

Of course I've seen West play. And no, I'm not talking about little 2 second clips in highlights where he steals a ball and throws it from the other side of the court to score and win a game. He went to West Virginia University, which isn't too far of a drive from where I live. You think they don't have archived video of him? You think I haven't given them a visit to research things at their library, and that it didn't cross my mind to check out the OG Mr. Basketball while I was at his alma mater?
so what facets of the game is he better at than Kobe?????

 

[gangsta207therevolution]

Being a teammate. Thats why Ska claims he would have traded Kobe for Kidd. With Jason Kidd on the Lakers in 2000 the Lakers would not have a title thiscentury.

 

[DCAllAfrican]

Originally Posted by 23ska909red02

I would take West, Maravich, and Iverson over Kobe.

Any day.

All day.

Every time you ask me.

Give Maravich, Iverson, or West the EXACT career Kobe has had... playing with one of the league's top 5 centers ever for like 8 years ('96-'97 to '03-'04, right?) and one of the top 3 coaches of all time, and they would at LEAST do what Kobe has done; I think they would do better, though.

Yea but you can't use "Ifs" as a basis for an argument.

 

[scottsauce88]

I can't wait until they invent something that will record a moving picture. That will be the day, my friend.
when you stated this, I stated this:

so what was watching Wilts 100 point game like, oh wait
why, because there are no tapes of Wilts 100 point game. What does that imply, even though there are still some tapes, they are still hard ashell to come by and not easily accessable. Yes, I realize I was talking about Wilt Chamberlain and not Jerry West, but guess what, they played in the same timeperiod meaning video isn't as accessable as you make it out to be.

For some reason here you brought up that you never claimed Jerry West wasn't great, even though I never mentioned it.

Then you reassert something you said before about seeing a player play on a consistent basis in order to judge his talent, which I just demonstrated is not necessary.

I was referring to this:

Yet, I can say with confidence that he is a great player and in my opinion he would belong on the list of top 10 SGs of all time, because it really doesn't take as much as you're implying it does to judge a player.

And the amount of footage I've seen of Iverson IS available of Jerry West, so it's completely possible for someone born today to accurately judge his abilities if they watch that material 20 years from now.

For some reason you seem to believe that's not possible, and that no one can accurately judge his talent because they haven't seen him play 'on a consistent basis'.

could be me, but it seemed to me you were assuming that I said no one can judge is talent, in this case I used the term greatness, my bad, when all along Iand others have stated that we werent talking about talent or greatness, both of which have been used in this thread, but the mere fact of calling someonebetter than another when it is pretty damn hard to see them play. I suppose it is probably my fault for using the term greatness instead of ability since ithas been used by others in the thread.

Well just leave it at that because right now neither of us are arguing the same thing. here is point and case:

Then you reassert something you said before about seeing a player play on a consistent basis in order to judge his talent, which I just demonstrated is not necessary.

However, then I respond:

I never said talent. All I said is you have to watch a player on a consistent basis to see that he is better than another. And before you respond, it iscompletely different.

To answer your next response:

All I said is you have to watch a player on a consistent basis to see that he is better than another player.

To answer your response after that:

All I said is you have to watch a player on a consistent basis to see that he is better than another player.

And the response after that:

All I said is you have to watch a player on a consistent basis to see that he is better than another player.

 

[jville819]

 

[allen3xis]

Not at the list, but at what I know is going on in this thread.

NBA talk on NT, so frustrating.

 

[bboy rewynd]

Originally Posted by 23ska909red02

I would take West, Maravich, and Iverson over Kobe.

Any day.

All day.

Every time you ask me.

Give Maravich, Iverson, or West the EXACT career Kobe has had... playing with one of the league's top 5 centers ever for like 8 years ('96-'97 to '03-'04, right?) and one of the top 3 coaches of all time, and they would at LEAST do what Kobe has done; I think they would do better, though.

LOL

Kobe, Jordan, West, Iverson

 

[scottsauce88]

Kobe, Jordan, West, Iverson
please god tell me that list isnt in order

 

[N41D]

Originally Posted by allen3xis

Not at the list, but at what I know is going on in this thread.

NBA talk on NT, so frustrating.

Bro, you are not lying...

Every single time one of these threads comes up, it always ends in some sort of 'Well, you cannot possibly argue Jerry West is better than Kobe, becauseyou weren't old enough to see him play and it's impossible to judge... If you weren't alive to see him, you cannot believe he's better thanKobe! It's absolutely impossible that you've seen enough game film to make that judgment, therefore, it cannot even be argued that West is better thanKobe. Because he's just not!' type +%!%... It never fails.

It's just sad that people cannot give credit and acknowledge that great athletes and players existed before their own time, and that some of thoseplayers just might have been better than their favorite players today... It's closed-minded. It's like arguing with the blind.
What's worse is,some of these guys are probably the same dudes running off Jim Brown at the top of their All-Time Great RBs list when that thread pops up...

 

[darthska]

Of course I've seen West play. And no, I'm not talking about little 2 second clips in highlights where he steals a ball and throws it from the other side of the court to score and win a game. He went to West Virginia University, which isn't too far of a drive from where I live. You think they don't have archived video of him? You think I haven't given them a visit to research things at their library, and that it didn't cross my mind to check out the OG Mr. Basketball while I was at his alma mater?

Scottsauce88:

---

so what facets of the game is he better at than Kobe?????

gangsta207:

---

Being a teammate. Thats why Ska claims he would have traded Kobe for Kidd. With Jason Kidd on the Lakers in 2000 the Lakers would not have a title this century.


Wait, when did I say I would trade Kobe for Kidd?

I've said Kidd's my favorite player, and I've expressed myantipathy for Kobe, but I think you out a couple things together and drew conclusions about me that I never said (read: 'put words in my mouth',something people seem to do a lot with me

).

However, Kidd did take Jason Collins to back-to-back Finals; I think he could have sealed the deal with Shaq.

But to answer your question, Scottsauce88:

First off, just because I answer... does NOT mean that I think I'm some expert. It merely means I'm answering.

Second, you're asking ME, right? So... you're asking MY opinion, right?

Just wanted to make sure that was clearly stated.

For ME, West's knowledge of basketball goes much deeper than Kobe's. You can tell in the way he plays that he is like a computer. And the basketball heplayed was ENTIRELY more pure than this game we're watching today, a game filled with whining, flopping, taunting, etc. All they had back then (in nearlyall sports) was the sport itself. There was little to no arguing with refs in any sport, or trying to show out, or 'cheat' by doing things likeflopping. The basketball footage I've seen of him (and all basketball footage I've seen from back then) is very underwhelming, because it's missingall the bells and whistles we're used to now. I have never seen any footage with sound, but the basketball was way, WAY more about... basketball. Offensiveplays were WAY less flexible than today's plays, and I can tell by watching that these guys STUDIED more than they WORKED OUT; footage from today wouldlead me to believe the opposite, that the emphasis is on athleticism, that people WORK OUT more than they STUDY.

So for me, West was far, FAR more cerebral than Kobe is. I will say that Kobe is THE... #1... smartest player in today's game, but hisbasketball-intelligence wouldn't have been a strong point for him playing in West's day. Yes, he would have made up for it in freakish athleticism, butI'm saying... 'basketball smarts' is one thing I give West.

Here's a couple weird little 'alternative universe' descriptions of what mean:
#1. I think West could do more in today's game with Kobe's body than Kobe is doing.
#2. I think Kobe could do less in yesterday's game with West's body than West did.

I think if you took West's knowledge and placed it in Kobe's body today, that new 'Kobe West' would be better than the current 'KobeBryant'.
And I think that if you took Kobe's knowledge and gave it to West's body back then, that new 'Jerry Bryant' would not be a good as the actual'Jerry West.'

OBVIOUSLY, that is a HUGE speculation with absolute NO WAY of being proven.

I was simply offering it as a way to explain what I was trying to say. I wasnot offering it as a factual statement I have tattooed on my back or anything.

And another huge, HUGE advantage I give West is 'attitude', something that people think bears no significance in how a team or an individual performs.I don't agree with that. I can tell that West valued his teammates highly, and that he didn't play like they were inferior sub-humans that are lucky tobe on the court with him. He played with a humble stoicism that you could tell wanted to just win the game; nothing else.

But those are both non-measurable variables ('knowledge' and 'attitude'). As far as measurable variables, West seemed to be a more peskydefender, and I'm not looking at any numbers to support that. he wasn't just active when the ball was on his side of the floor or near him; he would goto the ball and be active, and still defend his man or position, pretty much being in two places at the same time. You would think that if he leaves his man orhis position, the defense would be able to exploit that, but he was pesky enough to see what they saw, and was often able to cheat back to his position or manand steal the pass that came from a guy that thought West was just in front of him. Active hands, quick feet, and a tenacity to go to the ball on defense: Iwould give that to West.

Scoring? His arsenal of shots was nowhere... NOWHERE near what Kobe's was. BUT... this goes back to the player's body. So I would say that West did abetter job of using his body to create the right shot at the right time than Kobe does today, and that doesn't just go for scoring, but passing as well.Kobe slashes way more than I have ever seen West do, but damn... West could SHOOT. I mean, he would get in the lane, but in the game they played back THEN(which still wasn't very old or developed), guards didn't really go to the lane a lot; imagine a RB snapping the ball to a WR in football. That'sjust not the way it was done back then. Guards went in the lane if the play was drawn that way (and they virtually never were) AND the play worked. Guards wereshooters; the lane was for forwards and centers. So that's one reason why I've not seen a ton of footage of West in the lane... BUT he could get inthere and create some impressive shots.

However, it's a good point that was made earlier, that he came into an 8-team league, and exited a 16-team league. However, while that means that you getto play crappy teams more times (like playing the Timberwolves 20 times a year), it also means you have to play tough teams more (like playing the Spurs 20times a year).

me:

---

I would take West, Maravich, and Iverson over Kobe.

Any day.

All day.

Every time you ask me.

Give Maravich, Iverson, or West the EXACT career Kobe has had... playing with one of the league's top 5 centers ever for like 8 years ('96-'97 to '03-'04, right?) and one of the top 3 coaches of all time, and they would at LEAST do what Kobe has done; I think they would do better, though.

DCAllAmerican:

---

Yea but you can't use "Ifs" as a basis for an argument.

As the basis for an argument in a court of law, or in an actual debate somewhere? No, you couldn't use 'if' as a basis for somethinglike that. But as the basis for part of an opinion stated on a sneaker website? Ummm... yeah, I think that's fine.

Now to those of you jumping on me for using 'if' (and you weren't the only one, DCAllAmerican): whythe heck didn't any of you get at gangsta207 for saying that if Kidd was a laker in 2000, the Lakers wouldhave never won a title this century?

 

[jville819]

NT "where no one can have opinions happens"