RealGM

I don't know how anyone can be happy with the Bucks defense lately. It's been horrific, with really high efficiency by the other teams.

Wednesday is a good test. Can you keep a team like Boston under 50% shooting and under 40% from three? Can you actually guard the three point line and force Boston to shoot twos? Does Doc realize that you can't leave Hauser open, leave Jrue open on corner threes and leave Porzingis open on any shot?

Against really good teams, helping defense needs to be minimized and good individual defense is essential. Interested to see how they play it.

Sigra wrote:

rilamann wrote:Dame and Melo shouldn't be on the 75th anniversary team, but I would take Dame over Melo.

Maybe they were pick #74 and pick #75

Who would you pick instead of them?

Yeah, the issue is 75 is a lot of players where Dame is on the same list as Shaq, Lebron, MJ, etc. He may not be Top 75 based on someone's personal criteria, but he is definitely Top 90. PC board did their bi-annual ranking and had him at 75 exactly. Its not a perfect list, but they do a good job considering peaks, longevity, success, etc vs non-chalantly throwing out this guy is/is not a top 75 player.

Here are the ones around him:
72. Paul George
73. Bobby Jones
74. Rasheed Wallace
75. Damian Lillard
76. Kyle Lowry
77. Rudy Gobert
78. Dennis Rodman
79. Bob Cousy
80. Allen Iverson
81. Adrian Dantley
82. Sam Jones
83. Larry Nance

viewtopic.php?f=64&t=2301069
ETA they had Carmelo as 92 in 2020 (last time they did it). Jokic, a headliner, and a few other guys (PG, Embiid, Lowry) passed him already at <83 or will be added coming up (Dray, Horford, Luka, Tatum). Wouldn't be shocked if he is left off the list this year.

Like you may not think Dame is a all-time great, but you are in the territory of guys like Rasheed, AI, PG, etc who were all pretty damn flawed. I think AI is a pretty good comparision where he spent a lot of time being a ball dominant guy on a team that never really seemed like a contender. Dame has better longevity and will have a ring in a few month, though. (Honestly, if they re-do this list in 3 years Dame would probably be ~80 unless he has a ring, which would sky rocket him a little bit)

Dame is better than every person on that list besides maybe Gobert and prime PG which lasted like 3 years.

If Dame plays with another superstar in his prime, he is top 40. This is a silly discussion. Dude is great

I've been saying for a while that when Bobby scores 25 in a half that it puts the Bucks in good shape vindicated that FINALLY everyone is starting to realize but remember I said it first check the posts no I will not be providing any links go Bucks

MartyConlonOnTheRun wrote:

Sigra wrote:

rilamann wrote:Dame and Melo shouldn't be on the 75th anniversary team, but I would take Dame over Melo.

Maybe they were pick #74 and pick #75

Who would you pick instead of them?

Yeah, the issue is 75 is a lot of players where Dame is on the same list as Shaq, Lebron, MJ, etc. He may not be Top 75 based on someone's personal criteria, but he is definitely Top 90. PC board did their bi-annual ranking and had him at 75 exactly. Its not a perfect list, but they do a good job considering peaks, longevity, success, etc vs non-chalantly throwing out this guy is/is not a top 75 player.

Here are the ones around him:
72. Paul George
73. Bobby Jones
74. Rasheed Wallace
75. Damian Lillard
76. Kyle Lowry
77. Rudy Gobert
78. Dennis Rodman
79. Bob Cousy
80. Allen Iverson
81. Adrian Dantley
82. Sam Jones
83. Larry Nance

viewtopic.php?f=64&t=2301069
ETA they had Carmelo as 92 in 2020 (last time they did it). Jokic, a headliner, and a few other guys (PG, Embiid, Lowry) passed him already at <83 or will be added coming up (Dray, Horford, Luka, Tatum). Wouldn't be shocked if he is left off the list this year.

Like you may not think Dame is a all-time great, but you are in the territory of guys like Rasheed, AI, PG, etc who were all pretty damn flawed. I think AI is a pretty good comparision where he spent a lot of time being a ball dominant guy on a team that never really seemed like a contender. Dame has better longevity and will have a ring in a few month, though. (Honestly, if they re-do this list in 3 years Dame would probably be ~80 unless he has a ring, which would sky rocket him a little bit)

Iverson was the league MVP and made it to the Finals. Cousy is the only other MVP on your 72-83 list and has six rings. Both should be higher IMO. To rank dirty-ass Kyle Lowry anywhere near either of them makes me sad.

sidney lanier wrote:

MartyConlonOnTheRun wrote:

Sigra wrote:
Maybe they were pick #74 and pick #75

Who would you pick instead of them?

Yeah, the issue is 75 is a lot of players where Dame is on the same list as Shaq, Lebron, MJ, etc. He may not be Top 75 based on someone's personal criteria, but he is definitely Top 90. PC board did their bi-annual ranking and had him at 75 exactly. Its not a perfect list, but they do a good job considering peaks, longevity, success, etc vs non-chalantly throwing out this guy is/is not a top 75 player.

Here are the ones around him:
72. Paul George
73. Bobby Jones
74. Rasheed Wallace
75. Damian Lillard
76. Kyle Lowry
77. Rudy Gobert
78. Dennis Rodman
79. Bob Cousy
80. Allen Iverson
81. Adrian Dantley
82. Sam Jones
83. Larry Nance

viewtopic.php?f=64&t=2301069
ETA they had Carmelo as 92 in 2020 (last time they did it). Jokic, a headliner, and a few other guys (PG, Embiid, Lowry) passed him already at <83 or will be added coming up (Dray, Horford, Luka, Tatum). Wouldn't be shocked if he is left off the list this year.

Like you may not think Dame is a all-time great, but you are in the territory of guys like Rasheed, AI, PG, etc who were all pretty damn flawed. I think AI is a pretty good comparision where he spent a lot of time being a ball dominant guy on a team that never really seemed like a contender. Dame has better longevity and will have a ring in a few month, though. (Honestly, if they re-do this list in 3 years Dame would probably be ~80 unless he has a ring, which would sky rocket him a little bit)

Iverson was the league MVP and made it to the Finals. Cousy is the only other MVP on your 72-83 list and has six rings. Both should be higher IMO. To rank dirty-ass Kyle Lowry anywhere near either of them makes me sad.

And Dame is so much better than Iverson. Cousy shot 37% from the floor, not gonna romanticize that era lol. Lowry is not top 100, Kawhi merchant

sidney lanier wrote:

MartyConlonOnTheRun wrote:

Sigra wrote:
Maybe they were pick #74 and pick #75

Who would you pick instead of them?

Yeah, the issue is 75 is a lot of players where Dame is on the same list as Shaq, Lebron, MJ, etc. He may not be Top 75 based on someone's personal criteria, but he is definitely Top 90. PC board did their bi-annual ranking and had him at 75 exactly. Its not a perfect list, but they do a good job considering peaks, longevity, success, etc vs non-chalantly throwing out this guy is/is not a top 75 player.

Here are the ones around him:
72. Paul George
73. Bobby Jones
74. Rasheed Wallace
75. Damian Lillard
76. Kyle Lowry
77. Rudy Gobert
78. Dennis Rodman
79. Bob Cousy
80. Allen Iverson
81. Adrian Dantley
82. Sam Jones
83. Larry Nance

viewtopic.php?f=64&t=2301069
ETA they had Carmelo as 92 in 2020 (last time they did it). Jokic, a headliner, and a few other guys (PG, Embiid, Lowry) passed him already at <83 or will be added coming up (Dray, Horford, Luka, Tatum). Wouldn't be shocked if he is left off the list this year.

Like you may not think Dame is a all-time great, but you are in the territory of guys like Rasheed, AI, PG, etc who were all pretty damn flawed. I think AI is a pretty good comparision where he spent a lot of time being a ball dominant guy on a team that never really seemed like a contender. Dame has better longevity and will have a ring in a few month, though. (Honestly, if they re-do this list in 3 years Dame would probably be ~80 unless he has a ring, which would sky rocket him a little bit)

Iverson was the league MVP and made it to the Finals. Cousy is the only other MVP on your 72-83 list and has six rings. Both should be higher IMO. To rank dirty-ass Kyle Lowry anywhere near either of them makes me sad.

To be clear, not my list and just using as a list for discussion point. I probably have AI slightly ahead of Dame but will be pretty close. If you had Prime Dame with Mutombo in a weak east, I think they do pretty well that year. That aside, just looking at the names in that territory or the guys after, I think it's fair that pretty much everyone would have Dame as a Top 80 (85? if we want to be conservative) player of all-time. Anyone who is making it seem like a travesty are either being too nuanced or didn't give it enough thought.

Dame woulda ran the East if he played in that weak early 2000's era in the East. Would've shifted how the league plays, basically Curry before Curry.

"Winning bias" can account for half of those guys having a case over Dame. In reality, no rational basketball watcher would actually say they'd prefer to build a team around Rodman or Kyle Lowry as opposed to Dame. I always find it funny for instance, that a guy like Dantley has become so romanticized in the analytics age. Yeah, his efficiency jumps out as an extreme outlier for his era, but he 100% would be viewed as the ultimate empty stats nowadays.

Yeah Dame has been an actual monstrously positive player throughout his career, then there are guys who are clearly worse than Dame but get carried by ring narrative (Lowry) or an MVP (Iverson) or even nostalgia. Those lists just look dumb to me, where do you differentiate 'best' and 'most accomplished'. In reality Dame is one of top 50 players of all time to lace em up.

MiltownMadness wrote:Yeah Dame has been an actual monstrously positive player throughout his career, then there are guys who are clearly worse than Dame but get carried by ring narrative (Lowry) or an MVP (Iverson) or even nostalgia. Those lists just look dumb to me, where do you differentiate 'best' and 'most accomplished'. In reality Dame is one of top 50 players of all time to lace em up.

Let's judge Dame on him struggling, realizing he's a family man without his family in a new city post-trade.

Its a rough patch. Even within that he's had amazing play & hit clutch shots. I foresee a feast of crow.

Here's my ranking of the most accomplished players in NBA history: They're all great!

Dame is a lot like Iverson. Dame is more methodical, though, and Iverson more unpredictable. Like Dame takes shots that would be crazy by almost anybody else's standards, but they're pretty much always the same shot. Iverson was more Favre-ian.

emunney wrote:Dame is a lot like Iverson. Dame is more methodical, though, and Iverson more unpredictable. Like Dame takes shots that would be crazy by almost anybody else's standards, but they're pretty much always the same shot. Iverson was more Favre-ian.

Dame is definitely the Rodgers to Iverson's Favre

MiltownMadness wrote:

sidney lanier wrote:

MartyConlonOnTheRun wrote:Yeah, the issue is 75 is a lot of players where Dame is on the same list as Shaq, Lebron, MJ, etc. He may not be Top 75 based on someone's personal criteria, but he is definitely Top 90. PC board did their bi-annual ranking and had him at 75 exactly. Its not a perfect list, but they do a good job considering peaks, longevity, success, etc vs non-chalantly throwing out this guy is/is not a top 75 player.

Here are the ones around him:
72. Paul George
73. Bobby Jones
74. Rasheed Wallace
75. Damian Lillard
76. Kyle Lowry
77. Rudy Gobert
78. Dennis Rodman
79. Bob Cousy
80. Allen Iverson
81. Adrian Dantley
82. Sam Jones
83. Larry Nance

viewtopic.php?f=64&t=2301069
ETA they had Carmelo as 92 in 2020 (last time they did it). Jokic, a headliner, and a few other guys (PG, Embiid, Lowry) passed him already at <83 or will be added coming up (Dray, Horford, Luka, Tatum). Wouldn't be shocked if he is left off the list this year.

Like you may not think Dame is a all-time great, but you are in the territory of guys like Rasheed, AI, PG, etc who were all pretty damn flawed. I think AI is a pretty good comparision where he spent a lot of time being a ball dominant guy on a team that never really seemed like a contender. Dame has better longevity and will have a ring in a few month, though. (Honestly, if they re-do this list in 3 years Dame would probably be ~80 unless he has a ring, which would sky rocket him a little bit)

Iverson was the league MVP and made it to the Finals. Cousy is the only other MVP on your 72-83 list and has six rings. Both should be higher IMO. To rank dirty-ass Kyle Lowry anywhere near either of them makes me sad.

And Dame is so much better than Iverson. Cousy shot 37% from the floor, not gonna romanticize that era lol. Lowry is not top 100, Kawhi merchant

The only ones I'd romanticize from that era are Marilyn Monroe, Kim Novak and Nina Simone.

But in terms of basketball, most of you have no clue (not your fault) how good the players were from that era.

Judging a player on just their shooting percentage is a fools errand. The top 75 list should have an asterisk that says " most of this panel doing the judging have no clue about anyone who played in the sixties or earlier".

BigO wrote:

MiltownMadness wrote:

sidney lanier wrote:
Iverson was the league MVP and made it to the Finals. Cousy is the only other MVP on your 72-83 list and has six rings. Both should be higher IMO. To rank dirty-ass Kyle Lowry anywhere near either of them makes me sad.

And Dame is so much better than Iverson. Cousy shot 37% from the floor, not gonna romanticize that era lol. Lowry is not top 100, Kawhi merchant

The only ones I'd romanticize from that era are Marilyn Monroe, Kim Novak and Nina Simone.

But in terms of basketball, most of you have no clue (not your fault) how good the players were from that era.

Judging a player on just their shooting percentage is a fools errand. The top 75 list should have an asterisk that says " most of this panel doing the judging have no clue about anyone who played in the sixties or earlier".

Yeah it's definitely not my fault but if you time machined him to this era he would be the scrubbiest of scrubs. It's a fools errand to categorize players from the prehistoric days of basketball, different game. Anyways Dame is so much better at the game of basketball than Bob Cousy, that's what I'll quantify.

BigO wrote:The only ones I'd romanticize from that era are Marilyn Monroe, Kim Novak and Nina Simone.

Nina Simone for the voice, OK, but Kim Novak was overrated. Give me Lee Remick or Natalie Wood, and Kim Novak can wait in the car.

sidney lanier wrote:

BigO wrote:The only ones I'd romanticize from that era are Marilyn Monroe, Kim Novak and Nina Simone.

Nina Simone for the voice, OK, but Kim Novak was overrated. Give me Lee Remick or Natalie Wood, and Kim Novak can wait in the car.

Both Nina Simone (with her voice) and Kim Novak with her look, were very seductive. Natalie Wood had no charisma, nor taste in men.

And if Kim Novak was waiting in a car, she wouldn't have to wait for long.

I get annoyed when dumb Gen Z's barf out clearly wrong statements like how Bill Russell, George Mikan, and Bob Pettit "would be scrubs in today's league", but certain guys like Cousy and any other 6'1 guard who can't dribble with their off-hand absolutely would be fringe NBA guys in 2024. Don't let Boston homers convince you otherwise.

Love too rank the dames of yesteryear on real gm dot com slash bucks but since I'm here yes, I would fancy sharing a phosphate with Marpessa Dawn while casually discussing the likelihood of nuclear holocaust.