Tip-Off Timer counts down the days until the first game of the 2009-10 season. On Monday, there are 50 days remaining.Back in 1996, the NBA asked a group of basketball experts to come up with a list of the 50 greatest players in the history of the league. It was the 50th anniversary of the NBA, after all.
It was an impressive list, of course, with the likes of Bill Russell, Wilt Chamberlain, Oscar Robertson, Rick Barry, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Magic Johnson, Larry Bird, and Michael Jordan, etc. The full list can be seen here.
A hundred years from now, those players likely will still be on any list of top-50 players in league history. But what about some other players on that list, the ones toward the back end of 50 ... Paul Arizin, Dave Bing, Sam Jones, Hal Greer, Dave DeBusschere, Bill Walton, Robert Parish and a few others?
Who knows when the NBA will come up with their next list? Maybe there will be a Top 75 list in 2021. All we're saying is that if the NBA decided to redo that list today, they would have to replace three former players with three current ones: Tim Duncan, Kobe Bryant and Kevin Garnett.
And it would only be a matter of time before LeBron James would elbow his way into the Top 50. Heck, the only real question is whether or not he deserves to be there right now.
Other players would merit consideration also, such as Gary Payton, Jason Kidd, Steve Nash and perhaps Allen Iverson. And let's not forget Bob McAdoo, who very well could have been on the original list.
It's been almost 15 years since the NBA announced its list of the 50 Greatest Players of All Time. In other words, it's time to make a few substitutions. Here goes, checking in ...
Tim Duncan for Bill Walton: Duncan may very well go down as the greatest power forward in NBA history. He has to be on this list. Has to be. So, as tough as it is, we're removing Walton. You might suggest Walton should stay and Parish should go. We're keeping Parish on the list because of his durability, particularly when compared with Walton.
Kobe Bryant for Hal Greer or Dave Bing: Again, who is going to keep Bryant off this list? You can't do it. But somebody's got to come off. You make the call: Greer, Bing or someone else?
Kevin Garnett for Dave DeBusschere: There is no doubt that DeBusschere was a fierce rebounder, rugged defender and an important part of the Knicks' 1970 championship season. But is there anyone out there who would really take DeBusschere over K.G.? Didn't think so.
More Steinmetz on Twitter: @matt_steinmetz
Comments (Page 1 of 1)
The official Top Fifty DID give an indication the commissioner`s office was in New York City, it WAS a bit biased, mainly to the northeast and/or big cities. Bing because he played in Syracuse, New York, more than because he went pro in Detroit, I think. And he WAS good before he got poked in the eye, but he WASN`T as good after that. Fifty is a lot of guys, considering only about 8 usually play on a team, the others usually sit. Walton is another guy listed more because he was great in college, though the rare times he was healthy for a stretch, he was great in the Nba, too. Won MVP of the Championship in Portland, came off the bench, but ouplayed McHale, at least, in Boston. And power forward was a better position in the pros for him, I think, so I`d say he was maybe better than Garnett, but maybe put Duncan in ahead of Debusschere, who was probably only picked because he was a Knick. He was a coach/wing guard in Detroit, as well as a pitcher. Good, versatile, but not great. A lot of use prefer the style of Nash or Peyton to the style of Iverson, but All I, Iverson, was told to score, so he took the ball to the hole, and scored. blame his coaches for his selfish style, the man does his job, the way his coaches ordered, not the way many of us would have ordered. Too few championships is one thing Nash, Peyton, Kidd, Iverson, and others have in common. Folks pretend Wilt was a loser with 2, but West only had one, thanks to Wilt, Robertson one, thanks to Kareem, Baylor none, Barry 1, Erving, in the NBA, one, though he won also in the Aba, championships OR superstar stats are hard to come by, BOTH are even harder to come by. Sam Jones played on a lot of good Celtics teams, but I`d let him sit for Kobe Bryant. Yao, familiy name, Ming, personal name, and LeB J may earn their way into the top fifty, but Ming is out injured now, and James has barely won his first MVP yet. If he stays healthy, he`s best year may be directly ahead of him. Cowens would be a better one to drop than Parish, he didn`t play as long, didn`t pile up as many great stats. Lucas was better than Reed and Debusschere, but wasn`t as featured with the Knicks, had his best years out of town.
Giles, I let a lot of your crap slide but not this time. have you completely lost your mind?? Jerry Lucas was better than Reed AND Debusschere??? On what planet?? Better rebounder, NO. Better defender, NO. What exactly do you base this opinion on, I would love to know. were you watching then, or is this a stat thing?? No matter, you are wrong.
wat about shaq?
Shaq already made the top 50, deservingly, and no one is likely to consider taking him out.
dang they put him on that list in only like 4 years of his career. I didn't realize they put him on so quickly. My bad. But yea he definitely does deserve that even though he's been making me mad the past few years.
I've been waiting for someone to bring up that list again. Replace Pippen with Bernard King. How can a player half-way through his career be included in this. Pippen STUNK w/o Jordan. Bing must stay, omit Greer.
Pippen stunk w/o Jordan, eh? You do realize he won a league MVP without Jordan, and played the Knicks (who ended up going to the Finals) really tough with a supporting cast that was much worse than either of the teams Jordan had for the 3-peats, right? No, you don't, you have no idea what you're talking about.
No slickw143, Pippen committed the unforgivable crime of growing old and less good on the Rocket/Blazer teams he joined after the Bulls, none of which won a championship. How DARE he!
Rich, it is always possible for anyone to be wrong, so I will not contest your belief I am wrong about Reed and Debusschere being good players, but not as good as Lucas. Ignore his national championships in university if you want. Ignore his totalling more rebounds, if you want. Ignore his playing center, power forward, small forward, like Debusschere played power forward, small forward, and wing guard, when he coached Detroit and pitched in Detroit, if you want. Butcher was certainly very good in his own way, too. Ignore it was Lucas who played center most of the way winning the championship the famed game when Reed started, hit only two shots, and didn`t play the rest of the way. I could tell you how I know Luke was better, but even though you claim you played against Nate the skate Tiny Archibald, you probably wouldn`t believe me. It it is just my opinion, anyway. You are welcome to yours. Other guys online have assailed your opinions, but I haven`t, you have a right to them. And I`m glad since you live there that you feel you love New York. I joke about its bad points. New York comics standardly rag their hometown unnmercifully, but wouldn`t live anywhere else. You seem to be an old timer, maybe even older than me, and I`m ancient!, so I respect that. I hope you have a nice, not a crappy, day.
Thank you, Giles. Yes, I am an old timer and therefore my opinions are based solely on observation, not the stats I see endlessly on these blogs. Also, I thought the 50 Greatest was about the NBA, so no I don't consider college performance. I know the youngsters don't usually agree with me, and my questionable observations are sometimes based on emotion rather than fact. i.e..."Pippen stunk w/o Jordan" That is not entirely true, he was mediocre at best, I always thought he was a bit over-rated though and a whiner. As far as Lucas is concerned, he probably has better numbers since he was Oscar's only option in Cincy and played longer than Reed. I see we have a mutual appreciation for Wilt's greatness.You must remember Wilt's repeated statement that the defenders he dreaded most were Reed, Thurmond and Russell in that order. Not J. Lucas or P. Jackson.
YEAH I really like to AIM SCREENAME... WHY YOU ASK TO ME ABOUT IT ? VERY APPREICATED... PLEASE CAN SEND TO ME MAIL.. SMILE.
The problem with relying on personal impressions not rechecked by stats, is the media has a way of tainting those impressions with its hype, and that hype is not remotely realistic all too often. But two points about the quote from Wilt you mentioned. One, when he said it, he obviously hadn`t played Kareem yet, who was his toughest, most close to equal competitor, on both ends of the court, though not the hardest style match up, the more forward style centers were less competent, but a more difficult style. Two, you should notice it wasn`t just Lucas he didn`t mention, he didn`t mention ANY white guys. He felt the mainly white press would talk them up more than enough, so he only mentioned the good black guys, though white and black were both good and he appreciated both. I think of Lucas primarily at forward, which is essentially, where he replaced Bellamy in pairing with Reed. If Reed had stayed healthy, he might have made a better center than Lucas (doubtful, but certainly possible). Reed screened off, let Frazier do a lot of the rebounding, as well as Lucas, Debusschere, and before those two, Bellamy. Bells is still in the top ten in rebounding, Lucas used to be, Reed wasn`t. Jackson played mainly Counts, not Chamberlain, and mainly because Dave Stallworth was busy playing better guys. Jackson was an import role player off the bench because the Lakers were badly constructed, nothing more or less than that. His speed kept Counts from helping the other Lakers, and without another big guy, the Lakers were too small for the other Knicks, and Wilt was caught in no man`s land, if he went out to guard Lucas/Reed, his teammates were too small to guard the other Knicks inside, if he stayed in, Reed/Lucas would torch him from the outside. Offense is easy if you can shoot, and your man`s coach insists he not go out to guard you. But while I love size, I was reminding Jackson how his speed advantage on Counts, not Chamberlain, had made him an unlikely bench hero, despite his being merely a journeyman. Gasol has filled out too much to play forward now, but Bynum is even heavier, even more too awkward to play forward, and only thinks offense on top of that, not defense. He can score, but the Lakers need Odom and/or Artest, relative to their current roster, as their starting power forward. They play some D against quick power forwards. Jackson might have killed to be a Scott Pippen, not a Rambis. Pip is like a much less muscular LeB J, though not as good. Both are mediocre shooters from mid range, on out, but both drive, play D, and pass, though James is a much better playmaker. Neither is a great rebounder by power forward standards, but both are reasonably good rebounders by small forward and guard standards. It is only compared with the greats, the Baylor, Barry, Pettit, Johnson, Bird, (and among bigger forwards, Malone, Hayes, etc.), types, Pip is second rate. Compared to ordinary, regular season competition, he was pretty good.
Nice COLOUMN Giles, but is Pippen top 50 ahead of Bernard King or not in your opinion? I say no. I don't understand how a guy can be voted TOP 50 half way through his career.
Good point, Rich. And as we mentioned earlier, Shaq was voted in after only 4 seasons! Yes, it is a bit shocking, especially with the pro northeast bias they had, Bernie was left out for some of the guys who were picked. And I think Wilkins and McAdoo were left out, too. I never much cared for Dom, he was a low % shooter, dunked a lot, which should have been a high %, but he`s in the top scorers, and probably has to be picked. Now he`s retired, I might take Pip over Bernie, better D (Bernie was the better shooter, and a reasonably good passer for a wing man, too, maybe even a better passer, but didn`t have Jordan to pass to). But it is the argument I make about LeB J: sure, he will probably be great, and he`s already very good, but right now, he`s still the next George McGinnis. Mc was going to be the next Elgin Baylor. Folks were sure. And he played all five positions reasonably well, particularly on offense, and most small forwards, like Elgin, were not all D. But how many of us remember Mc now? Probably not many. Julius Erving eventually teamed with him. They couldn`t both be the new greatest small forward ever. Obviously, J came closer, counting his ABA stats/wins. But the reason folks are hyped as the new someone else is generally because they aren`t good enough to hype as the first them. And great though Doc was, Elgin was better, until age made him lazy getting up court under the wrong coach. Sharman was a speed coach, and Elgin eventually rested getting up on offense. Tied for last up, still a great half court player. The Lakers were TOO speed oriented. The Knicks were designed to take advantage of that in the half court. The Lakers had better players, but worse match ups. Too small to guard the Knicks` three runners inside, okay at power forward, except when Lucas played between Reed and Debusschere. They needed to start a Luca or Debuesschere type instead of Goodrich (though I loved Gale!, but he couldn`t beat out West at point and wasn`t a big, wing, guard), and if they didn`t start the Lucas type, they still needed one, at least off the bench, like Luke himself when Reed was healthy. The Lakers neglected the fact the lane had been widened since the Celts team Sharman was on was built. That meant a lone big couldn`t protect small perimeter guys posted inside anymore. Which was where the match ups let the Knicks beat the speedy, but except for Wilt, little Lakers. When rules change, strategies sometimes need to change. It is the problem the Cavs had against the Magic. West, Williams, and sometimes, off the bench, Gibson? Who was big enough to guard Pietrus, much less dearly departed Turkoglu? None of them. Teams need balance, speed and size. Counts lacked speed, Goodrich, though great, was stumpy. The Cav three point guards didn`t have Edwards, Mahorn, Laimbeer, Rodman, Salley, covering for them. Maybe Ilguaskas compares to Edwards, Varajao to Salley, but the rest up front? The Cavs just didn`t have it, only James played well, and the hype was SO ridiculous, even HE couldn`t live up to the hype, despite one of the better playoffs individual performances by a guy not named Russ/Chamberlain, ever.
Why not make a top 65 list?(based on 65 years of NBA)