Two Spurs on top 25 list

[PhillyDoc]

Can be opened by all.
http://www.hoopsworld.com/article_16803.shtml

[braeden0613]

Do they even check spelling on this website??

[msuh24]

hookt awn foniks reely werkt fer mee.

[PhillyDoc]

Made a few typos but they should be corrected by now was traveling and did not have access to NBA player name spellings but should have checked a few - believe me some of these names get everyone!

[curiousspirit]

Hey PhillyDoc, I really have to disagree with your selection of LeBron as number 2. He is a fantastic player but a poor defender. If being a poor defender is not important, then put _irk in his place. I like a lot of what LeBron has done to improve his shot, but IMO, he should not be the second best player in the league for this year.

I also don't agree with your choice for number one, but you said no arguments so I won't go any further.

I also think you way undervalued Chauncey (#14). He is the primary reason that Detroit is where they are IMO. He distributes the ball, sets up his teammates, takes shots when necessary ( especially crunch time) and plays pretty decent defense. You've got Artest and Pierce ranked higher than Chauncey which I totally don't understand.

Good info though. Thanks for posting.

[FinickyPete]

Man, they really ignored the spell check feature

[oldman]

Originally Posted by PhillyDoc

Can be opened by all.
http://www.hoopsworld.com/article_16803.shtml

Duncan 5 Parker 17 ... There is something wrong in this list...

[TheLadiesMike]

Am I the only person that has gotten tired of endlessly ranking things in top 10s, 25s or 100s?

[wcsf]

no

[Jose_TheGenius]

Originally Posted by TheLadiesMike

Am I the only person that has gotten tired of endlessly ranking things in top 10s, 25s or 100s?

i'd rank ur post in the top 10

j/k

[miguelito]

I don't have a big problem with the list, except for the atrocity of placing Bryant at the top. I can barely even type that without cringing.

Bryant is not the top playerin the NBA by any stretch of the imagination.

Please - look where he has "his team." A few days ago they were at .500. The "best player in the league" should be able to elevate any team to a higher level than that.

What Nash, Wade, LeBron, and Duncan have in common is that they all make their teammates better. Bryant simply doesn't do that. He just puts up numbers.

As for the rest of the list, not bad. I would have Wade at 1, followed by LeBron, Nash, Dirk, Duncan, then AI. So I'm good with Duncan at 5 - what Tim has accomplished with his injury this year is not only remarkable, but heroic. 90% of NBA players would've missed multiple games with that injury. But Tim has gutted it out for the team. And he did the same thing in the Finals last year on two bad ankles. Also, I would defintiely have Billips in the top 10, though, as much as I can't stand him.

Overall -- Good job, Doc.

[biglakerfan]

Originally Posted by miguelito

I don't have a big problem with the list, except for the atrocity of placing Bryant at the top. I can barely even type that without cringing.

Bryant is not the top playerin the NBA by any stretch of the imagination.

Please - look where he has "his team." A few days ago they were at .500. The "best player in the league" should be able to elevate any team to a higher level than that.

What Nash, Wade, LeBron, and Duncan have in common is that they all make their teammates better. Bryant simply doesn't do that. He just puts up numbers.

As for the rest of the list, not bad. I would have Wade at 1, followed by LeBron, Nash, Dirk, Duncan, then AI. So I'm good with Duncan at 5 - what Tim has accomplished with his injury this year is not only remarkable, but heroic. 90% of NBA players would've missed multiple games with that injury. But Tim has gutted it out for the team. And he did the same thing in the Finals last year on two bad ankles. Also, I would defintiely have Billips in the top 10, though, as much as I can't stand him.

Overall -- Good job, Doc.

Just one question, and I swear I won't post in this topic again. Who do Wade and Lebron make better on their team?

[xmiltsx]

Originally Posted by biglakerfan

Just one question, and I swear I won't post in this topic again. Who do Wade and Lebron make better on their team?

exactly what i was thinking, wade has shaq and got posey, williams, walker & payton in the offseason, plus he has zo and haslem, and got anderson this past trade deadline.

lebron got marshall, hughes & jones plus murray at the trade deadline. i say without that talent added, even though hughes has been out how long now, the cavs probably wouldnt have made the playoffs.

this top 25 last didnt make sense, and to me, and many others out there, was totally off.

[RichB]

Originally Posted by TheLadiesMike

Am I the only person that has gotten tired of endlessly ranking things in top 10s, 25s or 100s?

No. Are we the only two people that realize such a list means nada, zero and nothing?

[Robinson50]

Just because this kind of list means nothing doesn't mean that this particular list is not awful.

[PhillyDoc]

All a note re Amare Stoudemire has been added on the web site - he is surely a top 12 player when healthy and could be top 5 in a few years if he comes back strong - hope he does.

I will come to the defense of Bryant - he may be selfish, he may have baggage but right now he is the most feared player in the game offensively.

He is also leading a team to a record that many believe is due to him alone. I personally do not like Mr. Bryant but his game speaks for himself.

[JeremyAD86]

Originally Posted by msuh24

hookt awn foniks reely werkt fer mee.

Fan of Brian Regan?

[PhillyDoc]

"Just because this kind of list means nothing doesn't mean that this particular list is not awful"



Not sure if that is a compliment or a diss - either way, try to make your own. There is no right answer and I can defend this list. Give me the top 12 players and will mop the floor with anyone anytime.

[ro_50]

Originally Posted by PhillyDoc

"Just because this kind of list means nothing doesn't mean that this particular list is not awful"



Not sure if that is a compliment or a diss - either way, try to make your own. There is no right answer and I can defend this list. Give me the top 12 players and will mop the floor with anyone anytime.

Every writer has made a list at one time or another in their career. I have and I'm a part-time writer on the side.

[PhillyDoc]

Your list is probably a good one - the toughest IMO is the rankings from about 10-25 - so many good to great players.

My criteria:

1) Impact on game including defense
2) Size is a component of that - in history, bigger and taller players have overall meant winning ball, not that a small player cannot become a force, ala Iverson but James has an automatic advantage everytime out with his size.
3) "Clutchness" part of experience
4) One half year (ala Yao) not enough to move into top ten but he will get there.

[TheLogo]

Originally Posted by PhillyDoc

"Just because this kind of list means nothing doesn't mean that this particular list is not awful"



Not sure if that is a compliment or a diss - either way, try to make your own. There is no right answer and I can defend this list. Give me the top 12 players and will mop the floor with anyone anytime.

If you want to be a columnist learn how to write first. Otherwise get back to cleaning the floors.



-J.W.

[PhillyDoc]

Dear "J.W."

FYI: I did not write that first statement and with a couple of professional degrees and over a hundred professional publications of various types, I am confident I will never have to mop the floors (unless I want to do so in my leisure) to make a living.

Not that I look down on those that do, so by the way, what type of cleaning fluids do use in your daily work and do you do bathrooms as well?

Regards,

Peter Rumm, MD, MPH, FACPM