I think when you define a player as the best, I think you can't have only one player. I think you should do it by position because there are other players who can't do what others can. What I mean by that is that Wilt Chamberlain can't shoot 3s (not even his free throws) but scored 100 points. Steve Nash can't dunk (or maybe barely) but can dish out lots of dimes and shoot lots of threes. Kobe and Jordan can do anything in the stat sheet. But is it just about the stat sheet? How do you define an NBA player as great, or the best?
2007-12-19 22:43:34 · 12 answers · asked by anonymous 4 in Sports ➔ Basketball
I think the best player is one that can make his team better.
He is able to be very good play and at the same time make his teammates better.
2007-12-19 23:33:38 · answer #1 · answered by Dan K 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Fundamentally sound, not concerned with individual stats, willing to give up shots for the betterment of the team, plays good defense, is the main reason his team wins championships - Tim Duncan
Tweety, you're right on. I grew up in the 60's and 70's and this notion of Micheal Jordan being the best ever is a joke. Jordan had the fortune of being great during the ESPN era. Jordan is not the all time statistical leader in any category, including championships. Had Oscar Robertson played when ESPN was around. all this talk of Jordan being the best ever never would have happened.
2007-12-20 08:39:34 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
There is no true answer to this question, it all a matter of personal opinion. Most will say Jordan, hes got lots of rings, right?....Jordan also had a good team to back him up. Wilt did score 100, could he now, with the very big and talented guys of today, NO Way....The best player is one who can average a triple double or better every night.....There is no best
2007-12-20 07:20:19 · answer #3 · answered by Speedstar 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
2gadoo, what are you talking about?
"The first thing is how many Rings do they have. Then you look at how valuable they are to the team. Then stats.
Jordan was the best of all time, & Kareem-Abdul Jabbar is a close second."
If the first thing you go by is rings, how is Jordan even close the best ever?
How valuable they were to their team? It took Jordan FOUR YEARS just to "lead his team" to a winning record. And when he retired in 1993, the Bulls win total dropped from 57 to 55... In 1994, without Jordan, the Bulls sent THREE players to the all star team, including Grant and Armstrong, who only made the all-star team that ONE YEAR, despite spending a combined 28 years in the league. Scottie Pippen made all-stars out of these guys.
Not only did Jordan never lead his team to even a winning record without Scottie Pippen, he never even made the All-Defensive team without having Pippen as a teammate.. And the Bulls never got any recognition as a good defensive team until Pippen and Grant joined them...prior to that, with Jordan out there, their defense was a joke.
What other all time great took FOUR YEARS just to get to .500?
And what other all time great never even played on a winning team without having a top-50 teammate?
If you want to talk about a dynasty collapsing when the star retires, check out how the Celtics did in 1970, after Russell retired... look at their points allowed compared to any year that Russell was there.
The 1994 Bulls (without Jordan) allowed fewer points per game and held their opponents to a lower FG percentage than the 93 Bulls did, despite the fact that the "all defensive" Jordan RETIRED.
You lose the "best defensive player in the league", and your points allowed per game DECREASES along with your opponents field goal percentage? Explain how that happens.
You must think Robert Horry is about the 3rd best player of all time, huh?
Why don't you get back to us after you've actually watched a basketball game?
_______________________________________
Smelly pig, as far as Jordan's "passion for the game", give me a break, will ya? Jordan retired TWICE in his PRIME after wining a mere 3 titles in a row! How does that translate to "passion"? Bill Russell wins EIGHT IN A ROW, and he STILL WANTED MORE! Unlike Jordan, Russell was NEVER satisfied with what he'd accomplished....he always wanted more... Jordan twice wins 3 in a row and walks away both times?? THAT'S passion?? Please...
Also, it was ALL ABOUT popularity with Jordan... Jordan doesn't want to make a statement about anything he believes, because he thinks it might lose him fans and/or advertisers... Guys like Russell, Wilt and Kareem couldn't care less what anyone thought about them, and they spoke and wrote about what they believed re: different topics, even politics and religion.. Jordan doesn't dare take a stand on anything without checking with the bozos on Madison Avenue first. The guys' a robot.
2007-12-20 07:55:42 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Uh...Currently?...Between Kobe Bryant and Tim Duncan
All time is obviously Michael Jordan
2007-12-20 07:13:20 · answer #5 · answered by Terry C. 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The first thing is how many Rings do they have. Then you look at how valuable they are to the team. Then stats.
Jordan was the best of all time, & Kareem-Abdul Jabbar is a close second.
2007-12-20 06:49:35 · answer #6 · answered by 2gadoo 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Michael Jordan because of love and passion for the game of basketball it's not about money or popularity it's all about recognition
2007-12-20 09:54:39 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
All I have to say is....
Kobe is the NBA
The only reason would say hes not is cuz they are the types that see someone gettin a lot of attention adn instead of going along with it decide to hate on that person.
2007-12-20 06:47:29 · answer #8 · answered by Frank 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Who cares that he can't dunk...Nash is the best....he's getting a championship this year.
2007-12-20 07:14:57 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Some one who hustles, up or down ten, some one who always has their head in the game and are focused, and who are getting the results(20pts,7rb,7a)
2007-12-20 07:31:53 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋