What's new
By:

All-Time NBA Draft FINALS: Spycam1 vs. Ellis269

Who would win in a 7 game series?

  • Total voters
    34
  • Poll closed .
Eminence said:
Man, everybody talking about rings... rings and team record are NOT player evaluation tools, these are TEAM evaluation tools. One of the very last things I look at when evaluating players.
Click to expand...

But don't the very best elevate their teams to win and contend for championships?
 
I'll vote Spycam because it should be closer. But I think Ellis probably should win for being the first to build a good team around Jordan


Good Job Ellis.

Welcome to the Hack and Spycam club of winners
 
Thee jazz fan said:
But don't the very best elevate their teams to win and contend for championships?
Click to expand...

Not exactly, the very best obviously elevate their teams more, but it is measurable through all the traditional stats as well and rings should be one of the last things used to break ties. Anthony Davis was absolutely a top 5 player this year but his team was not even close to contention. Late 80's Jordan was a similar player to early 90's Jordan, but only one won rings. KG was better in the early 2000's but Minnesota was barely a playoff team while the Celts were contenders for 3 years. The examples could go on and on.

Teams win rings, not players. Nobody is good enough to just carry their team to a ring.
 
spycam1 said:
Fwiw, Rodman would spend a lot of time guarding Jordan, and Bird would guard Webber. Rodman making things difficult for Jordan was one of the reasons he couldn't get passed the bad boy Pistons back in the day. Not that that was the sole reason, or that that alone would shift this series in my favor, but having a guy like Rodman to guard Jordan, and Bird who can switch onto 4s is a really nice strategy. Rodman would be my first or second choice (along with Pippen) to guard Jordan.

Not that it matters. This stuff is still fun to talk about though.
Click to expand...

I think Jordan would have the mismatch advantage over rodman and webber would have the advantage over bird. I do think rodman would be hell on webber though and bird could do ok on pippen. I don't think playing them out of position is a good idea
 
Eminence said:
Not exactly, the very best obviously elevate their teams more, but it is measurable through all the traditional stats as well and rings should be one of the last things used to break ties. Anthony Davis was absolutely a top 5 player this year but his team was not even close to contention. Late 80's Jordan was a similar player to early 90's Jordan, but only one won rings. KG was better in the early 2000's but Minnesota was barely a playoff team while the Celts were contenders for 3 years. The examples could go on and on.

Teams win rings, not players. Nobody is good enough to just carry their team to a ring.
Click to expand...
Also true
 
Eminence said:
Not exactly, the very best obviously elevate their teams more, but it is measurable through all the traditional stats as well and rings should be one of the last things used to break ties. Anthony Davis was absolutely a top 5 player this year but his team was not even close to contention. Late 80's Jordan was a similar player to early 90's Jordan, but only one won rings. KG was better in the early 2000's but Minnesota was barely a playoff team while the Celts were contenders for 3 years. The examples could go on and on.

Teams win rings, not players. Nobody is good enough to just carry their team to a ring.
Click to expand...

All that proves is that a star can't win all by them selves.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Thee jazz fan said:
All that proves is that a star can't win all by them selves.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

So then what does the statement "But don't the very best elevate their teams to win and contend for championships?" mean to you? If you put a great player on any team that team will be better, but if you don't put them on at least an already good team then they aren't going to win. Point being lots of great players at various points in their careers didn't have good teams and thus didn't win, not because they weren't great but because their teams weren't good. Ring counting = crappy/lazy evaluation of individual players.
 
Put some other allstar sf on the heat and they don't have any rings over the last few years. Hell they don't make the finals. Take out Duncan and the Spurs aren't wining anything. There are a slew of 90's stars that don't have any rings because Jordan was simply the best ever. The only reason The rockets have any rings is that Jordan retired for two years. When was the last time a team won a chip with no stars? The Pistons and they had a lineup full of very good players which made that team very formidable. U pretty much need a top player to get a ring.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I honestly don't know what the point is you're trying to make. You're using some backwards logic. A good (championship in these cases) team will of course have good/great players. But just having that great player without the rest of the team won't make another team good. So the player is good in either case, but in one he wins and in one he doesn't. So I don't see much of a reason to use rings as anything beyond a minor factor in evaluating individual players.
 
spycam1 said:
To those saying Webber and Rodman are equal: I get where you're coming from, but how does Webber--as a 5th option--impact the game more than Rodman does with his rebounding and defense? Webber's peak years were great, but in terms of how each player would function within their respective team, I think Rodman clearly wins. Being on a team of superstars would in no way hinder what Rodman brings to a team.
Click to expand...

Webber was one of if not the best facilitators on offense from the high post. The dude averaged over 4 assists per game.

Webber is underrated as much as Payton is overrated.

Just like Hakeem >> Ewing. WTF Fish?


The thing I hate about these all time drafts, and the reason I haven't joined in since the initial (and was begged into that one), is that voting comes down to legacy more than actual play. Jordan >>>>>>>> Wade? Uh GTFO
 
Yeah I tried to play the "what would people vote for" angle this time around. The funny thing is I think I built a pretty solid team in the process. But these things are not about building the best team. It's about getting enough popular names to get people to vote for you.
 
Welp I know Hack didn't do too well this year, but I'd have to commend him on taking a pretty creative approach to this year's All Time Draft... pretty brave to surround Shaq with all those shooters.


It's an experiment, and even though it didn't work with the voters it was worth giving it a try I thought. He could have probably sold it better if he had the time but yeah.. well done for giving it a go.
 
Eminence said:
94 maybe. 95 though, Drexler/Horry played damn well in the playoffs, I wouldn't consider that a carry job by Hakeem at all.
Click to expand...

This. You may be young, but you know your basketball. :)


The Rockets were 6th in the West in '95 at the trade deadline before Drexler requested that trade from Portland. He played a pivotal role, so did Horry with some pretty clutch performances.
 
ONE LOVE said:
This. You may be young, but you know your basketball. :)


The Rockets were 6th in the West in '95 at the trade deadline before Drexler requested that trade from Portland. He played a pivotal role, so did Horry with some pretty clutch performances.
Click to expand...
Mario ellie?
 
Eminence said:
94 maybe. 95 though, Drexler/Horry played damn well in the playoffs, I wouldn't consider that a carry job by Hakeem at all.
Click to expand...

Jordan had Pippen but who else? Kukoc? Longely? Kerr? ... pretty much all the rings that Bulls won in that era I think most people would consider to be a carry job by Jordan?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top