Thread Tools

Display Modes

kflo · 10-31-2006, 05:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BadBaronRudigor

Nance for most of his career played the three just like Worthy. He was quicker than Worthy, a little taller, better leaper, most spectacular, better shotblocker . . . Worthy was stronger, had better back to the basket moves, more consistent, better court sense on either end. Not sure where you get this Worthy was a dominant scorer thing though . . . even with Magic Johnson, the greatest PG of all time, to set him up, Worthy was never a dominant NBA scorer or even as dominant as Nance in scoring despite Nance playing with shoot first PGs like Price and KJ rather than a pass first PG like Magic. Like Nance, Worthy got into the habit of deferring and never broke out over any long period of time.

i didn't say he was a dominant scorer - i said he was a go-to scorer, which he was. he was a legitimate first option, who could create his own offense, and who could force doubles. and he was easily quicker than nance - it was often one of his advantages over his defender. worthy didn't defer. he played his role in the offense, which was often, particurarly after '86, and particularly in the playoffs, to be the primary half court option for magic to work around. he took over plenty. nance never broke 20 ppg in the playoffs, once cracking 18, which shows somewhat his limitations (scoring limitations tend to get exposed in the playoffs).

**Pioneer10** · 10-31-2006, 10:15 AM

I have to agree with kflo that Worthy was a got to scorer which Nance simply wasn't. Worthy had a incredible quickness for a guy who was 6'9" with strength and replaced Kareem as the number one post option for the Lakers during the second threepeat. This is a role Nance was never cabable of IMO

**OneBadLT123** · 10-31-2006, 11:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diable

Worthy is in strictly on the strength of playing on multiple championship winning teams.Really he was just extremely well suited to playing the exact role that he played on the Lakers where he was always at least the third best player.

Dumars isn't overrated, but he's in the Hall because of how well liked he is and how good a job he did as a GM.Yes he's a terrific defender and a very good player,but not even close to the caliber of other recent inductees.He is a really nice guy so I won't act like him getting in upsets me horribly.

IMO the best two players that aren't in the Hall of Fame are Dantley and Artis Gilmore with Bernard King a little ways behind them.Most people don't realize how dominating Gilmore was in the ABA or how high he is on the all time scoring and rebounding lists.Of course most people here don't even know who he is except for old school Bulls fans.

He was mainly inducted for his skills, Finals MVP, and also his approach to the game. His attitude and focus were the image of what every NBA player should be. part of the reason why the sportsmanship award is named after him. Aside from numbers, its the character that got him in.

PauloCatarino · 10-31-2006, 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by da bully

your gonna really open up pandoras box with that one paulo, how about toni kukoc he did everything that was asked of him. i think they have the same amount of rings and kukoc was regarded as one of the best players in europe if not the best at the time. ill even go so far as to say that kukocs best seaon as a go to guy and worthys is about the same.

Please don't compare James Worthy to Tony Kukoc... Yeah, Tony was a heck of a player in Europe, but in the NBA, he couldn't hold James' jockstrap. This is like saying Drazen Petrovic was better than Michael Jordan because he dominated Europe like noone ever had...

Only the people that look at Worthy's stats think he is overrated. the likes of, oh, he didn't rebound much, did he? Oh, he wasn't a great passer now, was he?

Everyone that saw him play (and i freaking did) knows James Worthy was the guy to have on your side on a basketball game.

Sunsfan81 · 11-01-2006, 08:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BadBaronRudigor

can we limit this to players who played at least 5 seasons after 1960; lots of early players aren't very impressive. For later ones . . . several of the early Celtics got carried in by Bill Russell, I would include Sharman, KC Jones, and probably Heinsohn in that category. Similarly, Worthy is in the hall while superior peers aren't thanks to being carried there by Kareem and Magic. Not a big fan of the Maravich types either but like Iverson gets all-star selections, volume scoring gets you props even if it isn't connected to team success.

Oh and have I mentioned recently that Bill Bradley is the most overrated player in the history of the NBA?

Sharman, Heinsohn, and Worthy are all deserving Hall of Famers. You can make an argument KC Jones isn't, but I don't mind him being in.

Sunsfan81 · 11-01-2006, 08:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kflo

how many people know paul westphal was 1st team all-nba 3 times (2nd team once), and how often is his name mentioned around here?

his teammate walter davis was pretty good too.

Put them both in! Maybe I'm a little biased.

**Minstrel** · 11-02-2006, 01:11 PM

James Worthy was a very nice player to have on your team, no question. I don't think he's an all-time great and wouldn't be perceived as such had he not been a part of one of the great dynasties of all-time. He fit in nicely with those Lakers, though, as a power forward who could run the floor extremely well and hit open shots.

PauloCatarino · 11-02-2006, 02:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minstrel

James Worthy was a very nice player to have on your team, no question. I don't think he's an all-time great and wouldn't be perceived as such had he not been a part of one of the great dynasties of all-time. He fit in nicely with those Lakers, though, as a power forward who could run the floor extremely well and hit open shots.

Small forward...

The OUTLAW · 11-02-2006, 02:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PauloCatarino

Severall things wrong with this post (and i absolutely loved Larry Nance!):

1- Nance didn't play the 3;
2- He was not quicker than worthy, who was not as strong as him;
3- worthy was a great scorer. Not a volume one, but a greatly eficient one;
4- Nor Price nor KJ were shoot firdst PGs.. Sure, they were no Magic nor stockton... but then again, who was?
5- Worthy didn't defer (at least as i concieve the notion). Worthy was the fist option on offense after Jabbar's best years, and was also a great glue player.

Actually Nance did play the 3 an awful lot for the Cavs. He started at the 4 but Hot Rod (who got huge minutes as a sub) was on the floor with him for enormous amounts of time thereby putting Nance at the 3.

I have no idea who was quicker or stronger but I think that Worthy was likely quicker

Worthy was on one of the greatest if not the greatest fast breaking teams in the NBA. I think he had more offensive weapons than Nance but to be honest all I really remember him doing was getting fed for the dunk by Magic on the break.

It's hard to view either Price or KJ as shoot first. However, they were both scorers as point guards. Price was a SG when coming out of college and the Cavs ran a tremendous amount of pick and rolls between he and Daugherty. Price was also very well known for leading the break and rather than passing he'd elevated to drain the 3. I don't necessarily think this makes him shoot first, but I can see why others might view him that way. By the way, when did Nance even play with KJ? If I recall Nance was acquired by the Cavs in a trade that involved them sending away KJ.

I really don't think that Worthy was ever a first option (and I know without a doubt that Nance never was). That Laker offense was pretty much totally determined by whomever Magic gave the ball to.

Thread Tools Display Modes

Thread Tools

Display Modes