Professional and College Basketball Forums banner

Starting 5 all time

13K views 110 replies 15 participants last post by  Macto92 
#1 · (Edited)
Okay everybody post their all time 5, the catch is that you have to consider how they would most likely play together and support why their the best with at least a paragraph (Not to sound like a college professor).

Here's mine.

1. Magic
2. LeBron
3. The Claw
4. Pippen
5. Kareem

This is a team full of suger sharers with no ego or control issues (i.e. my problem with kobe and MJ). These guys would be dominant in half and full court.

The only potential issue: Making sure Lebron understands team ball.

Full Court: No is going to stop this fast break, and with Kareem as the slowest player the opposition would be hard pressed to score on the fast break too.

Half court: Threes, points in the paint, anything. This team would be an efficeint scoring machine with a god like fg %. Teams with two big men wouldn't be able to keep up and at the same time would still have trouble score with size every where.
 
See less See more
#2 ·
Magic
Curry
LeBron
Bird
Walton

Kill you in transition, amazing passing. Curry would actually be the first option if everyone can command a double team and leave Curry open. Alternate lineup that could be interesting is switching out LeBron for Rodman.
 
#3 · (Edited)
PG - Magic
SG -- Jordan
SF -- LeBron
PF -- Russell
C-- Olajuwon

I can guard Pick and rolls with unreal defenders at 4 positions. My center and PF are interchangebale and can also run the floor. Jordan/LBJ and Magic in their primes able to hit 3's and can low post and pass from it. Russell premiere passer only need him for dunks and not only a great willing passer but a tremondous rebounder on both sides. Bottomline I can spread the floor and my only defensive weakness is Magic. Every other position covered with extreme athleticism and supreme help defense.
 
#4 ·
PG: Magic
SG: West
SF: Bird
PF: Duncan
C: Russell

Why? Because these 5 players are the best team players of all time at their position, they all make players around them better. (This is why I chose West over Jordan, because West was less selfish). NO ONE on this team is selfish. No one has ego issues on this team.
 
#5 ·
I scoffed at first... but that team would be pretty legit.
 
#10 ·
Magic should be the GOAT in my opinion, the guy could play any position, yes defensively and offensively Jordan was better, but in terms of all around contribution to his team, Magic is the best. Won a Finals MVP in his rookie year, then brought the Lakers to NINE finals in his short career. We've seen Jordan-esque players like Kobe and Wade, but we will NEVER see another Magic-like player.
 
#14 ·
No-- he shouldn't be. Yes Jordan was better offensively and defensively which means he was better.

He brought Lakers to Finals with "bums" like Kareem Jabbar. Players like Worthy, Nixon and Wilkes.

Wade isn't in Jordan's league. How many scoring tiltes has he won? Did he win any DPOY's?
 
#13 ·
DJ was one of (if not the) best defenders of his era regardless of what team he played on (as you noted he was the best player on the Sonics squad that won a title) - McHale healthy was as good as any player in the league and the Chief was averaging hi teens and tens at GSW before he ever started playing with Larry

they were in fact all world talents (especially DJ and McHale) and had to be since the league and especially the East was so stacked at the time

I don't know about the Chief but McHale and DJ would have been hall of fame level talent regardless of what teams they played for - in fact DJ already had started making a case for the Hall before he ever got to Boston (finals MVP, multiple all star appearances, multiple 1st team Defense nods)
 
#16 ·
I don't see a team that would hold a candle to my squad... I think it sounds beautiful.
If I were a coach (highschool or any level), I would always be aspiring assemble a squad with that type of dynamic. A team with 4 big players that are totally versatile. The only thing that might make it better would be if Magic was a little more consistent of a 3 pt shooter.
Do y'all agree we me or no?
 
#18 ·
No - I think my team is much stronger. You've diregarded rebounding. You have a weak offensive reboudning team and a smalll not good defensive rebounding team. One of the 3 fundamentals of basketball is rebounding. IMO you've sacrficed way too much of it for the 6'7 - 6'8 versailtiy you want.
 
#25 ·
if you're referring to my post above please understand that an argument is "a reason or set of reasons given with the aim of persuading others that an action or idea is right or wrong"

and a statement is "a definite or clear expression of something in speech or writing" (which doesn't imply that it is true btw)

and I was pointing out that hoopsfan101 had not in fact made an argument he had simply stated an opinion which is not at all the same thing

now as to the veracity of that opinion? who knows
 
#30 · (Edited)
PG - Chris Paul - best facilitator for a team with such insane scoring options
SG - Michael Jordan - cause MJ
SF - LeBron James - cause GOAT
PF - Dennis Rodman - most underrated player of all time, overwhelmingly greatest rebounder ever and in the discussion for greatest defender ever
C - Shaq - cause Shaq (this one I'm not 100% on, Hakeem and David Robinson are legitimate options too, or Wilt)
 
#34 · (Edited)
PG - Chris Paul - best facilitator for a team with such insane scoring options
nope - there's a guy who in real life actually orchestrated a high octane offense and maintained a happy balance with a passel of high teens and twenties ppg dudes - it's not a hypothetical (as it is with Paul - there is actually no basis in fact for your supposition Paul is typically a primary in his team's offense), this fellow actually did it and he did it so well, so entertainingly, with such panache that they said it was like going to a show - whenever this team played they said it was "show time" because he did it so well

you want to talk about facilitating such a mix of scoring options? only one dude has already done it and he made it look like Magic when he did
 
#38 · (Edited)
advanced numbers from the 60s are sketchy at best - bballref doesn't even list Russell's rb% numbers so I'm not sure where you got those

and keep in mind that rb% is impacted by other players on your squad and by the roles they play - if your first and only job is rebounding and all your teammates are performing other roles your % number will be inflated - it's why you see primary scorers like Bird or Dirk have low orb% (because they're taking the shots) but high drb% (because they're playing off the ball on D) - it's why you see Dwight having such high numbers when he's essentially surrounded by swings playing on the perimeter - role impacts the % to a great extent


but I can say that Russell's career average is 19.8 rebounds per 36 minutes while Rodman's career average is 14.9 per 36m which adjusted for pace etc qualifies as at least putting Russell in Rodman's class (if not better)
 
#39 ·
advanced numbers from the 60s are sketchy at best - bballref doesn't even list Russell's rb% numbers so I'm not sure where you got those
See the link. Some dudes in the internet.

and keep in mind that rb% is impacted by other players on your squad and by the roles they play - if your first and only job is rebounding and all your teammates are performing other roles your % number will be inflated - it's why you see primary scorers like Bird or Dirk have low orb% (because they're taking the shots) but high drb% (because they're playing off the ball on D) - it's why you see Dwight having such high numbers when he's essentially surrounded by swings playing on the perimeter - role impacts the % to a great extent
That's very true.

but I can say that Russell's career average is 19.8 rebounds per 36 minutes while Rodman's career average is 14.9 per 36m which adjusted for pace etc qualifies as at least putting Russell in Rodman's class (if not better)
Don't know about that. Rodman's rebound numbers are just staggering (obviously, like you said, they were enhanced for his role on offense - that is, quitting scoring).

Regarding TRB% (and for what i know, it accounts for pace, etc.), interesting to see Dwight Howard up there. Dude is an heck of a rebounder. And, off course, Wilt is just... Wilt. If we can compare a guy like Russell to a modern-day Dwight Howard, a modern-day Snaq O'Meal still doesn't come close to Wilt...
 
#42 ·
@e-monk
Because I don't think he was a better rebounder than Shaq. In Shaq's physical prime he avg'd almost 13 rpg with a lot of minutes. I think it's ridiculous to say that Bill Russell would do much, if any better than Shaq at all, especially avging that through a 12 season career. I mean I think its just dumb to look at rebound numbers from 50s to even early 80s a little but and say there wasn't a difference. Every single person has god-like rpg compared to a player of that size and position today. You can't tell me they were just all freak rebounders at the same time.

And I think he was trolling, lol
 
#50 ·
Indeed, I think Rodman is at an elite level as far as basketball IQ. I hate to give such an esoteric concept a quantitative ranking, but if I had to I'd say he's borderline top 10.

there is no TRB% information from before the mid-70s so this doesn't really mean anything
I thought the calculated TRB% was already presented in an above post, wasn't it? The data, as far as I can tell, is not merely guesswork.

btw #PauloCatarino - this is the statement you are arguing in support of
I don't think he was agreeing with me, he merely corroborated data which may have a bearing on the discussion.

Indeed I think Russell is one of the great rebounders of all time. I do not think he is even in the realm of reaching Rodman, nor do I think anyone will ever come close.
 
#47 · (Edited)
The less informed version of the “Chamberlain/Russell Caveat” (CRC for short) typically goes something like this: “Rodman led the league in rebounding 7 times, making him the greatest re bounder of his era, even though his numbers come nowhere near those of Chamberlain and Russell.” It is true that, barring some dramatic change in the way the game is played, Chamberlain’s record of 27.2 rebounds per game, set in the 1960-61 season, will stand forever. This is because, due to the fast pace and terrible shooting, the typical game in 1960-61 featured an average of 147 rebounding opportunities. During Rodman’s 7-year reign as NBA rebounding champion (from 1991-92 through 1997-98), the typical game featured just 84 rebounding opportunities. Without further inquiry, this difference alone means that Chamberlain’s record 27.2 rpg would roughly translate to 15.4 in Rodman’s era – over a full rebound less than Rodman’s ~16.7 rpg average over that span.
btw I just picked a single year (Rodman's best rpg season 91-92) because I'm lazy but counting league averages for missed shots and FTAs there were more like 102 rebounding opportunities per game in that season not 84

and picking another year at random from the 60s (62-63) the number is actually closer to 120 than 147
 
#55 ·
Wait, since when does Shaq have a mediocre skillset?

I mean he couldn't make a jumpshot/freethrow. But he had incredible footwork, positioning, he had a great one hander/hook shot over either shoulder, good baseline moves, was a phenomenal ball handler and passer for his size, good shot blocker, etc. I'm surprised to read someone calling Shaq's skill mediocre.
 
#56 ·
Shaq is one of my favorite players and imo the greatest center of all time... sorry mediocre was an exaggeration, he had a reasonably strong skill set, but I think it pales in comparison to the likes of Hakeem, Robinson, etc. and where he trumps them is in his strength and size.
 
#59 · (Edited)
@Voyaging
I think its kinda silly to say Shaqs offensive skill pales to Robinson. Robinson had some great offensive seasons, but Shaq had WAYYY more successful seasons (volume). He actually scored more points than Hakeem per season consistently during their primes. Yeah, Shaq used his size a lot, but Robinson's skill pales to him? I think it was very skillful the way Shaq utilized his size and strength.
Its an extremely bold statement to me, just look at the numbers, the accolades and etc. I think the only big man who you could say has no question better offensive skill than Shaq is Hakeem. Maybe Kareem too, but anyone else is a bold statement.

And I was refering to their size, not their game.
 
#60 ·
Shaq was 90 pounds heavier at the same height, the size and strength difference between them was massive. The NBA hasn't seen a physical specimen like Shaq, he was one of a kind and if he were David Robinson's size with the same skillset he would've been an above average center at best; not even mentioned in the greatest centers ever discussion.
 
#67 ·
you act as if having great teammates somehow factors into whether a player can be considered the GOAT -- that is the flaw in your argument

Your perception/interpretation as to how I “act” i.e. how I write is your own interpretation. My reply was for those “that act” like “because Magic got to so many finals it means he is GOAT.” THAT is the flaw in their argument.

Pippen was great player. I still have Jordan 1. Russell had Cousy and Hondo – but I still have him 2.

This isn't an "all or nothing" point. You have to take in context what Magic had as teammates and look athis competition leading into the Finals. Not just look at Celts and Sixers. My reply to the poster was to the "Nine NBA finals." My reply had nothing to do with having to get by Celts or Sixers. That's not what the poster said.

yes Magic had more help but he faced sterner competition

But he had more help. His help – ie Jabbar was often superior to his competition.

competition that kept Mike on sub .500 squads for the first three seasons of his career (whereas Magic won finals MVP as a 20 year old rookie),

While Magic played with the league MVP.

competition that knocked Mike's Bulls out of the playoffs another 4 years running - it wasn't until Mike got more help with the maturation of Pippen and Grant that he could start winning his titles

Whereas Magic had one as a teammate one of the greatest 4 players to ever play along with a terrific cast of support the moment he joined the Lakers.

again I'm not arguing that Magic is the GOAT over Mike what I'm saying is that everyone including Mike needs help and that the quality of that help required is relative to the strength of the completion you face


I’m not arguing Magic wasn’t great. I’m saying that if you have the imo one of the top players to ever play – in the top 4 all-time like Jabbar, he’s going to dominate his position at such a level that he is going to make it easy for other players including Magic. You can be GOAT even if you have great teammates but you can’t say like what the poster said below (in italics) and for those like that poster just disregard the teammates Magic had as if his teammates weren’t relevant at all.


but in terms of all around contribution to his team, Magic is the best. Won a Finals MVP in his rookie year, then brought the Lakers to NINE finals in his short career

The following information can’t be ignored imo:

1--- Magic joined a team that was 47-35 in prior year, Jordan joined a team that was 27-55. Those that use “Magic went nine times to Finals” can’t use it against Jordan because Jordan didn’t have a top 4 all-time teammate and other prime talent that Magic had the moment he stepped on the court and then use “getting to 9 finals” as a reason why he is superior to Jordan.


2---Before 85-86 (and after Magic came) – Jabbar just had to compete against Moses in the West– what other great center was he competing against before getting to the finals? One time – the sub-500 Rockets? And what other great center? Jabbar’s superiority and impact can’t be ignored before 85-86. Assume Jabbar as an A grade- he is considered an A Level player. Leading to the finals other than 80-81 and before 85-86, if he is going against level b- players while Jordan is going against level C palyers shouldn’t matter that much. Neither are going to lsoe a general rule. Jabbar is still decisively beating his man/impacting the game. The B- player can make it a bit tougher – but Jabbar is still going to dominate and win in the West.


3--- Then he competes against Parish for a few years and one year – his team got decimated by injuries vs Moses. But Parish vs Jabbar? Big advantage for Jabbar. SO we’re supposed to hold it against Jordan because his team was nothing until he came while Jabbar was clearly dominant big man for the most part before 85-86 helping Magic a great deal because he wasn’t going against elite centers basically until the finals, right? I’ll reiterate the poster above is giving credit of Magic over Jordan for getting to nine finals. Sure it is impressive but it has to be taken in context that Jabbar just wasn’t just “good” but he was SUPER. Jordan didn’t have Pippen play SUPER for some time. It doesn’t matter as much that Jabbar played against tougher competition, he was usually the best player or 2nd best player but best big man on the court. That can’t be ignored just because a guy like Parish (or many of the centers from the West) was good to great. Jabbar was better. He was nearly unstoppable. He wins that position over-and-over for Magic – not only wins but it is Jabbar that the offense runs through – while Jordan had to wait for Pippen. One player in basketball is enormous. It was an enormous advantage for Magic to have Jabbar dominate his position. People just can’t throw “nine finals” without a context. It shouldn’t be the “separator here” between the two.


4--- You even said you don’t know if Parish would be “HOF talent” – and this is what Jabbar was going against. I think Parish was “great” but a much lower tier than Jabbar. SO even though Lakers are competing against more talent than the Bulls, the separation of overall talent on the Lakers vs. the teams leading into the finals was huge too. Because it wasn’t the same doesn’t matter that much. They both were significantly stronger leading up tot he finals. Just because it may have been a bit tougher doesn’t mean Jordan should be dropped as the poster seemed to do as I’ve highlighted in italics.


5---Bottomline is the poster is speaking of “getting to the finals 9 times.” Anyone that uses Celtics and/or Sixers in these discussions if a poster mentions “nine times getting there” – it is wrong. You aren’t going through those two teams if you are the Lakers before getting to the finals. They were Eastern Conference teams. The Lakers were going through inferior teams before 85-86 –before they even faced Celts or Sixers.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top