|
|
Top NBA Players Of All-time
Suite101 ranks the best overall NBA players
© Mark Barnes
Jan 6, 2007
NBA basketball fans love to argue about the best NBA players of all-time. Suite101 puts the argument to rest with our Top 3 All-time NBA Players.
Michael Jordan? Wilt Chamberlain? Kobe Bryant? Shaquille O’Neal? Who’s the better NBA player? Perhaps you prefer Bill Russell, Oscar Robertson or even LeBron James.
When deciding on the Top NBA Players of All-time, we look at several factors. Some players, you see, are tough to compare. Chamberlain was so much bigger than his peers that his stats are stilted. There’s no disputing that Wilt’s numbers are staggering, though.
So, is it possible to rank the best NBA players, even across eras? We think so. Here’s our criteria:
- Longevity – To be considered one of the top NBA players of all-time, a player must have at least 12 years in the NBA. This time span shows that a true star could perform well when young and at least a couple of years into his thirties, when most players begin to decline. This eliminates some of today’s greats like, LeBron James and Kobe Bryant, who both might make the list a few years down the road.
- All-around statistics – The best NBA players of all-time shine in virtually every statistical category. We consider points, rebounds, assists field goal percentage, free throw percentage, steals and blocked shots.
- NBA titles – The greatest NBA players of all-time win NBA titles. Their surrounding cast is irrelevant, because truly great players bring out the best in their teammates. Plus, they have a refuse-to-lose mentality.
- Intangibles – Although intangibles bring in subjectivity, we like this category, because it adds flame to the debate. Intangibles include how unstoppable a player would be in any era and the player’s ability to take over a game on any night under even adverse circumstances.
With these three categories in mind, here are Suite101's Top 3 NBA Players of All-time.
1. Michael Jordan – Our greatest NBA player of all-time, Michael Jordan, is nearly perfect in all four of our criteria for ranking the greats. In 15 NBA seasons, Jordan led the NBA in many of our key statistical categories at one time or another. Jordan’s stats are uncanny:
- 30 points
- 6 rebounds
- 5 assists
- 2.3 steals
- 50% FG
- 84% FT
- 3-time NBA MVP
Jordan led his Chicago Bulls to 6 NBA titles, including many memorable performances when he was sick and when teams double- and triple-teamed him. Jordan could destroy defenses with the 3-point shot or he could leap over 7-foot defenders for crazy slam dunks. Michael Jordan could do anything he wanted on virtually any night. No other player can say this.
2. Oscar Robertson – If Oscar Robertson had been a little better shooter and won a few more titles, he would finish in a virtual tie with Michael Jordan on our Top 3 NBA Players of All-time list.
The Big O is the only player, other than LeBron James who is too young to qualify for our all-time NBA players list, to average better than 25 points, 7 rebounds and 7 assists per game in a career. Of course, Robertson is most known for averaging a triple-double in one season and missing by one-tenth of a rebound per game in another season. Robertson’s career stats, though, are something to behold:
- 25.7 points
- 7.5 rebounds
- 9.5 assists
- 44% FG
- 84% FT
- 1-time NBA MVP
In terms of NBA titles, Oscar Robertson was far less prolific than Jordan, although Robertson did lead his team to one title. Considering intangibles, Robertson didn’t have MJ’s flamboyance, but Robertson’s size and agility made him nearly impossible to defend one-on-one.
3. Larry Bird – No all-time NBA players list would be complete with a player from the storied Boston Celtics. It may surprise people that it is Larry Bird who makes our list, instead of Bill Russell or Bob Cousy. Although we strongly considered both Russell and Cousy, these two greats just didn’t meet each of our criteria, and Larry Bird does. Consider Bird’s statistics:
- 24 points
- 10 rebounds
- 6 assists
- 50% FG
- 89% FT
- 1.7 steals
- 3-time NBA MVP
Bird played 13 NBA seasons and left at the top of his game. He led his Boston Celtics to three NBA titles. As far as intangibles go, Larry Bird had a few. Unlike many players his size (6-9, 230), Bird could post up even the best and biggest defenders, but he could also pop outside the 3-point arc and crush teams with his amazing shooting.
Although he shot just 38% from behind the arc, Bird was considered the best pure shooter of his time and one of the greatest shooters in history. Plus, Bird, like Michael Jordan, had more killer instinct than anyone. He was notorious for telling opponents he was going to beat them. Then, he did it, making Larry Bird one of the top 3 NBA players of all-time.
Players who missed our list. . .
- Wilt Chamberlain – Sure, Chamberlain’s stats are ridiculous (30 points and 24 rebounds). But Wilt averaged 31 shots per game in his first seven seasons and nearly 40 in his biggest years. He was an awful shooter, and we believe he’d be dominated in today’s game by bigger, stronger players.
- Shaquille O’Neal – A true NBA champion with outstanding career numbers. Shaq’s pathetic free throw shooting was a huge detriment. We’re also not certain he could win titles without great teammates like, Kobe Bryant and Dwayne Wade.
- Bob Cousy – The creator of the point guard position, Bob Cousy was Magic Johnson, before Magic was born. He was one of the great passers of all-time and a wizard with the basketball. Too bad Cousy was one of the worst shooters of his time.
The copyright of the article Top NBA Players Of All-time in Basketball is owned by Mark Barnes. Permission to republish Top NBA Players Of All-time in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.
Comments
Jan 6, 2007 10:08 AM
Mark Barnes :
Who are the all-time best NBA players? Do you agree with Suite101? Who is left off of the list?
Jan 6, 2007 11:14 AM
Ryan Ward :
Magic Johnson! You can't leave Magic out of the picture, he was a five time NBA champ, three time NBA MVP and probably the best passer of all time! 19.5 ppg, 11.2 apg, and 7.2 rpg!
Jan 6, 2007 2:46 PM
Mark Barnes :
Hey Ryno, Magic is a great suggestion. Since we only ranked 3 of the all-time NBA players, though, it was tough to get him in.
I can't put Magic ahead of Bird. Magic probably should have been on the just missed list, though.
Thanks for chiming in.
Jan 29, 2007 7:27 AM
Candice E. Shaw :
WILT CHAMBERLAIN CAN'T MISS YOUR LIST AND IT BE CONSIDERED LEGIT.
Wilt revolutionized the center position, scored 100 points in a game and was totally dominant. Probably, the most dominant player to ever play in the NBA. He also was at the top of teh league in assists one year. He had no equal. The closest thing he had to an adversary was Bill Russell. Russell had more championships and played on more talented teams.
And there is no way Larry Bird ranks ahead of Magic Johnson. Magic had more titles. Magic beat Bird in college and the pros. Magic played five positions including the 42 he poured in at the center position as a rookie filling in for Kareem Abdul-Jabar [The NBA's all-time leading scorer and another guy you left off your list]
Feb 9, 2007 6:29 AM
eric barnes :
I agree about Wilt, although when he played he was a foot taller than everone else. 30 points and 23 rebounds a game for his career. That's mind blowing even if you're playing against a team of horse jockeys every night.
LeBron should be posting these numbers right now.
Feb 9, 2007 8:01 AM
Mark Barnes :
You're right about LeBron James. He should make this list in a few years, if coaches don't hold him back.
LeBron will be one of the greatest NBA players of all time.
Feb 9, 2007 8:04 AM
Mark Barnes :
Magic was the toughest decision for me. If our greatest NBA players of all-time list was longer, Magic Johnson would definitely be on it.
When you consider scoring, rebounding and the long-range shooting, though, I really can't put Magic ahead of Larry Bird.
Mar 2, 2007 7:43 AM
Mark Barnes :
If LeBron James or Dwayne Wade shot the ball 40 times per game, they'd average 50 or better, too.
All Wilt was was bigger than everyone else. If he played in today's NBA, he'd be no better than the third or fourth best center in the game.
Mar 28, 2007 2:34 PM
Phil Partington :
I'm sick of these sorts of rankings and I really should write an article about it (hmmmmm).
Not to take anything away from Wilt, but the guy was 7-2 and about 240lbs, which at the time was HUGE. Every so often he might have faced a guy who came close to 7-0. But, when he did, that player usually weighed from 200-220lbs. More often, he faced guys that were 6-7 to 6-9, including Bill Russell. People forget that Russell was only 6-9 215lbs! Moreover, Wilt had no left, which was OK because he dwarfed everybody.
Again, not to take anything away from Wilt, but comparing players outside their eras is pointless. It's all circumstantial. Wilt didn't have the same type of coaching and athletic training that athletes of today have and players weren't paid like they are today. If you pulled him out of his era and put him into ours, centers like Shaq and Olajuwon, etc..., would have embarrassed him...period.
Jul 5, 2007 4:08 AM
paul rabe :
Okay first off, to say that if LeBron or Wade shot the ball 40 times a game they would average 50 is ridiculous. Chamberlain shot 54% for his career one of the highest of all time, including the all time single season high at 72%. James and Wade don't even come close to him in fg percent. Also, Chamberlain holds these individual records- Season scoring average 50.4 Most points single season 4029 Scoring average rookie Season 37.6 Most games 50 or more points, one season 45 Most games 50 or more points, career 118 Most consecutive games 50 or more points 7 Most games 40 or more points, one season 63 Most games 40 or more points, career 271 Most consecutive games 40 or more points 14 Most consecutive seasons leading league in scoring 7 (tied Jordan) Most points single game 100 Most points by a rookie single game 58 to name a few (there are pages more but im tired)
Oh by the way, if you want to talk about field goal attempts guess who is the all time leader in average field goal attempts. It's Jordan if you didn't already know.
Also, lets take into considerstion that he is the all time leader rebounder and probably blocker (they didnt record blocks when he was playing).
As far as not being able to compete against the athleticism of today, they changed the rules for free throws because he was able to doing a standing slam dunk from the free throw line. Tell me one player who could do that today.
"I still remember the time when one of our strongest men, Gene Conley, decided to fight Chamberlain for the ball. He grabbed it and hung on and Chamberlain just lifted him and ball right up towards the rim."
-- Bill Russell Go up For Glory, p.126.
I forget the exact quote but it was something like, "the NBA tried to make the game harder for me and easier for Jordan"
Sep 15, 2007 12:55 PM
Phil Partington :
Chamberlain was strong, but it's still silly to compare him in his era to that of players today. The game is different. As far as the dunk from the foul line thing, he was allowed to do it (as I understand this) for foul shots. Then they changed the rules and he sucked as a free throw shooter from then on. I've heard a lot of things...good and bad. Another take is that most of his rebounds came from intercepting teammate's shots, going over the back (remember everyone was 5-7 inches smaller and 50 plus pounds less...if Shaq could do that he's average a million boards too), blocking shots by slapping guys' arms before the rules changes. I'm not saying this is all true, but him being able to dunk from the foul line doesn't make him a God. He was a high jump champ before basketball remember. The fact is, Chamberlain was going up against players who were 6-7 to about 6-10 and weighed roughly 200lbs. Plus, he had no left, or never used it, and the defense back then was less existent than it is today (have you watched old clips? guys look like road cones). The game has evolved. Does that mean that he wasn't a beast? Of course not. If you took him out of his time and developed him in today's era, I'm sure he would have dominated. All I'm saying is that the game is different and comparing Chamberlain to Shaq or whomever is as pointless as comparing apples to oranges.
Jan 6, 2008 1:49 AM
Ryan Ward :
This is a debate that will go on forever with no real certainty on who was the greatest or exactly who belongs in the top three all-time, but I would have say besides MJ, number 2 and 3 got to go.
Without a doubt, the Big O was a phenomenal player (reborn in LeBron James), but if I remember correctly he only has one ring throughout his whole career. Larry Bird on the other was one of the greatest shooters all-time (even though it was one of the ugliest shooting forms all-time), but he doesn't belong in the top three (in my opinion) because Magic (his arch rival) was a better all around player and won more championships (5).
If I were to make this list I would definitely go with MJ at the top as he is here, the #2 spot would be filled by the best point guard all-time in the Magic man and finally at the #3 it would be a tie between a number of players like Bill Russell, Wilt the Stilt, Kobe Bryant and Kareem.
Kind of a Lakers bias, but that is just my opinion!
Just my opinion!
Mar 28, 2008 7:56 AM
Jerold Piiter :
Mark you said "If Oscar Robertson had been a little better shooter and won a few more titles, he would finish in a virtual tie with Michael Jordan on our Top 3 NBA Players of All-time list." Well you got Oscar's FG% wrong when you listed it at 44% when it is at .485!! Oscar could never win a title in Cincinnati when they never had a center who could match up in any way with Bill Russell of the Celtics and could never get by them in the playoffs. For that matter he never had a Chamberlain, Walt Bellamy or a Nate Thurmond who were some of the dominant centers of the day. When Rick Barry hooked up with Nate Thurmond they went far as did Jerry West when he and Baylor finally played with Chamberlain. As soon as Robertson he got traded to Milwaukee he finally got a center to feed in Jabbar... and they won the title in '70-'71. Now Jordan didn't go anywhere until Phil Jackson built a team around him. He also could get by the Celtics or Pistons before Jackson came aboard. For that matter Jordan couldn't pass as well as Oscar or Magic(in fact he never looked to pass until Jackson schooled him) and really didn't make the players around him better as did Oscar, Magic or Bird. Another thing is that Robertson was out on the court almost the whole game every game(look it up)...his FG% and FT% would've been even better if he ever got a rest!! I know I seem to be running down Jordan but...the big publicity machine of the NBA didn't really get going until the 1980's and with Jordan I think it reached it's zenith. People didn't follow the NBA (no cable) like they do now and Oscar Robertson wasn't known outside basketball circles like Jordan. Anyway Jordan was great but I don't think he was better than Robertson, Bird or Magic.
Mar 28, 2008 9:04 AM
Jerold Piiter :
Mark you said "If Oscar Robertson had been a little better shooter and won a few more titles, he would finish in a virtual tie with Michael Jordan on our Top 3 NBA Players of All-time list." Well you got Oscar's FG% wrong when you listed it at 44% when it is at .485!! Oscar could never win a title in Cincinnati when they never had a center who could match up in any way with Bill Russell of the Celtics and could never get by them in the playoffs. For that matter he never had a Chamberlain, Walt Bellamy or a Nate Thurmond who were some of the dominant centers of the day. When Rick Barry hooked up with Nate Thurmond they went far as did Jerry West when he and Baylor finally played with Chamberlain. As soon as Robertson got traded to Milwaukee he finally got a center to feed in Jabbar... and they won the title in '70-'71. Now Jordan didn't go anywhere until Phil Jackson built a team around him. He also could get by the Celtics or Pistons before Jackson came aboard. For that matter Jordan couldn't pass as well as Oscar or Magic(in fact he never looked to pass until Jackson schooled him) and really didn't make the players around him better as did Oscar, Magic or Bird. Another thing is that Robertson was out on the court almost the whole game every game(look it up)...his FG% and FT% would've been even better if he ever got a rest!! I know I seem to be running down Jordan but...the big publicity machine of the NBA didn't really get going until the 1980's and with Jordan I think it reached it's zenith. People didn't follow the NBA (no cable) like they do now and Oscar Robertson wasn't known outside basketball circles like Jordan. Anyway Jordan was great but I don't think he was better than Robertson, Bird or Magic.
Mar 28, 2008 1:09 PM
Jerold Piiter :
ยป vito2 - All-time NBA Players
Mark you said "If Oscar Robertson had been a little better shooter and won a few more titles, he would finish in a virtual tie with Michael Jordan on our Top 3 NBA Players of All-time list." Well you got Oscar's FG% wrong when you listed it at 44% when it is at .485!! Oscar could never win a title in Cincinnati when they never had a center who could match up in any way with Bill Russell of the Celtics and could never get by them in the playoffs. For that matter he never had a Chamberlain, Walt Bellamy or a Nate Thurmond who were some of the dominant centers of the day. When Rick Barry hooked up with Nate Thurmond they went far as did Jerry West when he and Baylor finally played with Chamberlain. As soon as Robertson got traded to Milwaukee he finally got a center to feed in Jabbar... and they won the title in '70-'71. Now Jordan didn't go anywhere until Phil Jackson built a team around him. He also could get by the Celtics or Pistons before Jackson came aboard. For that matter Jordan couldn't pass as well as Oscar or Magic(in fact he never looked to pass until Jackson schooled him) and really didn't make the players around him better as did Oscar, Magic or Bird. Another thing is that Robertson was out on the court almost the whole game every game(look it up)...his FG% and FT% would've been even better if he ever got a rest!! I know I seem to be running down Jordan but...the big publicity machine of the NBA didn't really get going until the 1980's and with Jordan I think it reached it's zenith. People didn't follow the NBA (no cable) like they do now and Oscar Robertson wasn't known outside basketball circles like Jordan. Anyway Jordan was great but I don't think he was better than Robertson, Bird or Magic. -- posted by vito2
Apr 1, 2008 8:16 AM
Phil Partington :
First, great points. Second, I'm not sure I think Jordan wasn't better than Magic and Bird, but that isn't what I'm trying to argue anyway. What I will say is that I think comparing players outside of their era is kind of pointless, because the game changes so much over that amount of time. It isn't comparing apples to apples. The easiest example would be to try to compare Shaq with Wilt. Obviously, no one has been nearly as dominant statistically as Wilt was in his time. Does that mean he could dominate the same way now? Doubtful...especially if you consider that most centers he played against were in the 6-7 to 6-10 range and barely weighed 200lbs (if that). He was 7-2 240lbs. People will then say that by that reasoning Yao should do better than he does, but a 7-6 300lbs center going up against 7-footers who weigh in the neighborhood of 250lbs - 275lbs on a nightly basis is not the same as a 7-2 240-pounder going up against Dolph Schayes or other 6-8 sized players. Hell, Bill Russell was only 6-9 and about 215lbs!
My point here in this overly long explanation is that I don't believe in comparing apples to oranges. The Big O was amazing and so were Magic, Bird and MJ. Comparing the last three is tough, too, b/c they peaked at different times. I still say Jordan was the greatest and it has more to do with his resolve than it does his passing ability. Obviously Jordan before Phil Jackson is the one folks remember. Though, he was still a damn good player pre-Phil Jackson. He didn't pass as well like you said, but he still scored in the mid 30 ppg range while shooting at or above 50% most of the time. That tells me he scored his points WITHIN the offense and didn't force the ball as much as people think. That, or, he was just incredible at making acrobatic shots. I think it's a little of both.
At any rate, we could compare til we choke, but I tend to leave players from different eras out of it, because it's really hard to measure stats outside of their context era.
Apr 1, 2008 8:19 AM
Phil Partington :
I always hate the whole "he doesn't have a ring" or "only has one ring" argument when determining which player is better. I don't think you can use an argument that measures a team's accomplishments and apply it as the sole argument for whether one player is better than another. Championships have as much to do with circumstances than anything else, and all I'd have to do to discredit your argument would be to suggest that had the Big O had a dominant team like Bird or Magic, he might've had more than a few rings, too.
17 Comments
|