Who's The Best NBA Player Ever Not Named Michael Jordan?

[PlayTheGame]

So in a previous thread, we came to a fairly common consensus that we'd put no one over Michael Jordan as the best of all-time. He's widely regarded as such, and just about everyone who commented here felt the same way. With that as a foregone conclusion, who would you then put in the #2 spot? If Michael Jordan is the best of all-time, who's next in line as the second best? Before I throw in my 2 cents, I'll open this up for some others to discuss first.

I'm sure we'll get some good discussion going on the #2 spot, as it is much more controversial and up-for-discussion than the #1 spot. So who's the best NBA player of all-time not named Michael Jordan?

 

[Tastycles]

Bill Murray.

 

[Harthan]

Tough call. I'd have a hard time separating it between Shaq, David Robinson, and Wilt Chamberlain.

 

[Monkey_Mania]

Chamberlain, Bird, Shaq, Bryant, Julius Irving, and Walt Frazier are very good candidates for that spot. Along with Kareem Abdul Jabbar and Hakeem Olajuwon.

 

[Unsold Bacon]

This names are all right. But does anyone think LeBron has a chance to take that spot? Just asking.

 

[hatehabsforever]

This names are all right. But does anyone think LeBron has a chance to take that spot? Just asking.

Personally, I don't think that LeBron James has any chance of ever earning the distinction of being the best, or even the second best, in the history of the NBA. A very good player, no doubt about it, but not one of the best of all time.

 

[Harthan]

This names are all right. But does anyone think LeBron has a chance to take that spot? Just asking.

More than a chance, practically a guarantee. All LeBron has to do is finish his career at his current pace and with longevity of the caliber of the elite and he'll cement that spot, potentially even surpassing Jordan.

 

[Big Sexy]

Magic

 

[Big Sexy]

With LeBron it depends on the number of rings he ends up with. No way do I see him passing MJ regardless.

 

[hatehabsforever]

More than a chance, practically a guarantee. All LeBron has to do is finish his career at his current pace and with longevity of the caliber of the elite and he'll cement that spot, potentially even surpassing Jordan.

I'm not buying this, not for a second. I wouldn't even speak of James and Jordan in the same sentence until LeBron wins at least three titles, and even then, he would only be beginning to approach the legend that is Michael Jordan. I'm not convinced, when all is said and done, that LeBron James will even be in the top ten of all time by the time he calls it quits.

 

[Moon Knight]

I'm not buying this, not for a second. I wouldn't even speak of James and Jordan in the same sentence until LeBron wins at least three titles, and even then, he would only be beginning to approach the legend that is Michael Jordan. I'm not convinced, when all is said and done, that LeBron James will even be in the top ten of all time by the time he calls it quits.

Agreed. LeBron will never be the best ever and it is annoying people give him that label before he has even won a title. Even MJ said he should have at least one title before we begin these comparisons.

#2, either Magic or Oscar Robertson.

 

[PlayTheGame]

I could see potentially top ten for LeBron, but no way he surpasses Michael Jordan. His critics will point out that those (potential) titles came with Dwyane Wade and, to a lesser extent, Chris Bosh. This is not my argument, but one proposed by Skip Bayless and supported by Stephen A. Smith, and I can't help but see their point. LeBron sacrificed his legacy and overall public appearance a bit by going to the Heat. Sure, it'll probably land him success, but the scrutiny of not only his personal character but his game on the court are more than present, and probably will be there even after he's done.

Not to mention, of course, that although the Heat may be the Title favorites this year, they still have yet to accomplish much as a team with LeBron and Bosh. No one remembers East Conference Finalists. They have a lot to live up to and haven't gotten it done yet. Let's not put the cart before the horse.

 

[GI Cake]

 

[Harthan]

Whatever. Everyone wants to hate on LeBron because it's so fashionable. I'm from Cleveland, and even I recognize and acknowledge his ridiculous talent. The rings argument is total garbage and not even one worth having. The greatest basketball player of all time could have zero rings. A team effort in a limited sample size of games that allows bias from matchup quirks that are eliminated over the spread of the regular season has very little worth as an evaluator of talent.

 

[hatehabsforever]

Whatever. Everyone wants to hate on LeBron because it's so fashionable. I'm from Cleveland, and even I recognize and acknowledge his ridiculous talent. The rings argument is total garbage and not even one worth having. The greatest basketball player of all time could have zero rings. A team effort in a limited sample size of games that allows bias from matchup quirks that are eliminated over the spread of the regular season has very little worth as an evaluator of talent.

I'm not a LeBron hater by any stretch of the imagination. I liked him just fine when he was still in Cleveland, not so much since his arrival in South Beach as I'm not a fan of the Heat, with or without LeBron.

No one would argue his "ridiculous talent", but it takes more than that to be considered one of the best of all time and to be compared to Michael Jordan. The rings argument is absolutely not garbage. To be considered one of the best ever, I believe you have to hold impressive single game stats, single season stats, as well as career stats, but over and above that, you have to have won it all, and multiple times at that. There is no way that the greatest of all time can have zero championships. The best of all time has to be able to elevate the entire team and overcome adversity, regardless of sample size of games and matchup quirks. The issue is not an evaluation of talent, but rather, whether or not this evaluation ranks him amongst the best ever.

 

[PlayTheGame]

I don't have anything against LeBron, I'm just not about to prematurely annoint him as a serious contender to beat out MJ and quite a few others on the best-of-all-time list. You're dismissing the rings argument because it happens to not work with your argument. The point of every sport is to win the season's championship(s), depending on the sport. But it's generally the same goal. Completing that goal is one of the many factors that has to be taken into consideration when evaluating a player. It's not the point/goal of the job for nothing. It's not the end-all-be-all, but it certainly warrants consideration. And since LeBron has 0 rings at the moment, it handicaps him in best of all-time talks. Most recognize this to be true, sportscasters, journalists, fellow athletes, and even LeBron himself. Here's a quote from the horse's mouth: "Well, I mean, to me, I think my ultimate - my ultimate goal is winning championships and - and I understand that me going down as one of the greats will not happen until I, you know, win a championship."

 

[Big Sexy]

The rings argument is not garbage right now because LeBron is a member of the most talented team in basketball. Last year he and the Heat failed. This year if they don't win then they fail. LeBron is the best player in basketball right now from a pure talent perspective but he needs to win multiple rings in his current situation. Until then he can't be considered in the second best of all time argument.

 

[PlayTheGame]

The rings argument is not garbage right now because LeBron is a member of the most talented team in basketball. Last year he and the Heat failed. This year if they don't win then they fail. LeBron is the best player in basketball right now from a pure talent perspective but he needs to win multiple rings in his current situation. Until then he can't be considered in the second best of all time argument.

well said

 

[Big Nick Dudley]

For a long, long time, it was Magic. Kobe has five. That's a lot, Shaq or no Shaq. I'd say they're at least tied at this point.

 

[Megatron]

People need to calm down on Lebron... he's only 27. I know he's been in the league for almost a decade, but can you really blame him for not winning a title in Cleveland with Mo Williams and Antwan Jamison as his top options? The fact they even made the Finals in 07 is remarkable considering who he was working with. Sure, he didn't do the 'noble' thing by leaving Cleveland, but my god, what incentive did he have to stay? He did what others are constantly criticized for NOT doing - going to the best place possible to earn a title. Not money, not fame. He wanted (and will eventually) get a ring.

I know they choked last season, but Dirk deserves some credit for having one hell of a playoff run. Plus, with less pressure and attention on them this season, that's allowed Lebron to return to playing the type of game he was playing during his last few years in Cleveland - as the best player in the game. If he wins the MVP this year (which I'd say he's the favorite for atm), he'll have won 3 in 4 years, something that only the greats have done (Bird, Magic, Kareem, Wilt, and Russell). Give him a few years, once his skills begin to diminish, and he'll be thought of as one of the best.

EDIT: As for the question, I'd say Magic. He had great versatility and was one of those 5 above that I listed.

 

[Big Sexy]

I'm not hating on LeBron, I'm just saying that he can't use the lack of talent excuse anymore for not winning a title. He is the most talented player in the NBA and he's on the most talented team. As long as the key players stay healthy then this current group has no excuses not to win multiple titles. Every year they don't win has to be considered a failed year, like last year. LeBron with one title eventually moves into the top 5 all time and with 2-3 more can be in discussion for number 2 all time, but right now he isn't in the conversation.

 

[ProudFlairMark]

When I think the greatest player not named Michael Jordan, I immediately think Hakeem Olajuwon. I hate to say that considering my favorite player of all time, Patrick Ewing, was routinely outplayed by him, but facts are facts. Olajuwon ended the 1994 season MVP of the league, Defensive Player of the Year, Finals MVP and All NBA First Team. Growing up in New York, I was, am and always will be a HUGE Knick fan and, Patrick Ewing will always be one of the greatest Centers to ever play the game, but Olajuwon was just that much better.

 

[The Best]

Kwame Brown.

Just kidding, I would probably say Wilt Chamberlain. Wilt was just so dominate his whole career, which is probably because he was the first true big man (besides George Miken probably). I do think LeBron can pass him though, depending on how many rings LeBron gets. I don't think LeBron will pass Jordan, but he can definitely get up to number 2. LeBron is like Wilt in a way, I think. When Wilt came around, no one could match his pure size, and dominance in the paint. No one else in the NBA today has both the speed, height, and strength all in one that LeBron has, and that's what makes LeBron so dominate. He has the size of a small forward, but the strength of a center, and the speed of a point guard. Those three factors (in my opinion) are the reasons why LeBron is so dominate.

 

[Stormtrooper]

Kobe is way up there. And I have him about 9000 spots ahead of LeBron.

LeBron is yet to win a damn thing, and call me when he actually makes a big shot, instead of passing to a random Jabroni.

 

[Moon Knight]

Whatever. Everyone wants to hate on LeBron because it's so fashionable. I'm from Cleveland, and even I recognize and acknowledge his ridiculous talent. The rings argument is total garbage and not even one worth having. The greatest basketball player of all time could have zero rings. A team effort in a limited sample size of games that allows bias from matchup quirks that are eliminated over the spread of the regular season has very little worth as an evaluator of talent.

Nobody is hating on Lebron or saying he has no talent. Just because we don't think he is the greatest or will become it doesn't mean we hate him. The rings argument is not garbage, it only means nothing when the player in question doesn't play on good teams. Karl Malone is better than Pau Gasol even though Pau has more rings.