Ketch's 10 Thoughts From the Weekend (A special Memorial Day edition...)

[AEB1989]

I think that's too simplistic of a way of looking at the discussion.

He was a player with more limitations than any other all-time great player. He wouldn't be special today. Every other guy on that list would be.

While I think Bill Russell is worthy of consideration, I've often thought that guys like him, Oscar Robertson and Wilt benefited from the competition they played against. The league looked a lot different back then and those guys would've had a whole lot more challenges with today's competition.

 

[utguz]

Julius Erving.

 

[Ketchum]

Geoff, of course I'll agree with you on that. Their sweep of TCU, coupled with OSU's collapse was great drama. I'm such an old that I can remember some of Augie's teams and his fiery "influence" to encourage them not to lose their momentum going into the post season. I assume you were in Austin last week but I was at the Brick and I had a great view of our dugout. We were totally okay with losing to an 8 seed (while leaving the tying run on 3rd) and then losing to our biggest Big 12 rival. Leaving OKC as the first team out- less that 24 hours after our Game 1 opening pitch, is , to me, a huge concern that we're trying to gloss over. I'm hoping my concern is unfounded, but today it's real to me.

Just win in June.

 

[Ketchum]

I am mostly OK with the top 10 but while Shaq was dominant, he was no more than a slam dunk and blocked shot phenom. Hakeem and Tim Duncan had complete games. As several have pointed out, Hakeem owned Shaq in their head to head matchups. Shaq even acknowledged more than once that Hakeem had his number.

Hakeem was in his prime and Shaq was a very young player when the squared off. It's a bit dishonest not to acknowledge it. The Shaq that won three titles with the Lakers is unlike any beast in NBA history.

 

[Ketchum]

Julius Erving.

One of my sports heroes, but not a top 10 player.

 

[Ketchum]

While I think Bill Russell is worthy of consideration, I've often thought that guys like him, Oscar Robertson and Wilt benefited from the competition they played against. The league looked a lot different back then and those guys would've had a whole lot more challenges with today's competition.

In a league lacking the type of physical monsters we've seen in the last three decades, Russell was a limited offensive force, who changed the game defensively and let a host of Hall of Famers handle the heavy lifting elsewhere. He never had an elite level post-season on par with what the true greats of the game have been forced to produce because moments asked them to.

 

[TexanInMA]

While I think Bill Russell is worthy of consideration, I've often thought that guys like him, Oscar Robertson and Wilt benefited from the competition they played against. The league looked a lot different back then and those guys would've had a whole lot more challenges with today's competition.

I know it's simplistic as is much of the debate. I don't think Russell is the best of all time - I just think it's short sighted to eliminate himAdditional context - Spurs and Celtics fan who still has the license plate shown in my icon...

I'll go a little deeper. If you follow this logic, you'll have almost no top 10 team stars from the 60s or earlier in the "big 3" US sports. You play the schedule you're given in the era you live(d). All of the game have changed dramatically.

That said, you look at the Sixers. Wilt (enuf said), Billy Cunningham (HoF, 50th Anniversary - 50 Greatest Players in NBA history), Hal Greer (HoF, 50th Anniversary - 50 Greatest Players in NBA history), Chet Walker (7x All Star, HoF), ...

Let's also look at the Celtics. Why are Don Nelson (No honors) and KC Jones (No honors) HoF other than being swept up in the Celtic green glow?

Russell was the glue that facilitated the team's success in an era where Michael Jordan, if he had played at that time, would have spent most of them on the floor with the physicality of the play.

Listen to Russell and Wilt starting at the 2:25 mark of this video on who's the greatest.

 

[Ketchum]

I know it's simplistic as is much of the debate. I don't think Russell is the best of all time - I just think it's short sighted to eliminate himAdditional context - Spurs and Celtics fan who still has the license plate shown in my icon...

I'll go a little deeper. If you follow this logic, you'll have almost no top 10 team stars from the 60s or earlier in the "big 3" US sports. You play the schedule you're given in the era you live(d). All of the game have changed dramatically.

That said, you look at the Sixers. Wilt (enuf said), Billy Cunningham (HoF, 50th Anniversary - 50 Greatest Players in NBA history), Hal Greer (HoF, 50th Anniversary - 50 Greatest Players in NBA history), Chet Walker (7x All Star, HoF), ...

Let's also look at the Celtics. Why are Don Nelson (No honors) and KC Jones (No honors) HoF other than being swept up in the Celtic green glow?

Russell was the glue that facilitated the team's success in an era where Michael Jordan, if he had played at that time, would have spent most of them on the floor with the physicality of the play.

Listen to Russell and Wilt starting at the 2:25 mark of this video on who's the greatest.

I think I'd probably have him in the 11-15 range.

 

[Okie4horns]

Kind of where I'm at with it as well.

Agreed.

Speaking of....is there a story brewing on Plonksy's role? What are you guys hearing there? I always thought softball and basketball were her projects.

 

[drizzew]

I can tell you that everyone associated with every other Big 12 softball team wants us to hire MacKay as the HC. A parent of a recruit who has committed to OU told me last week that MacKay was the reason his daughter ruled out Texas early and that he lacks respect amongst high school coaches and select team coaches. I've got a good friend who is very close to the HC at Florida and OU and they both are hoping that MacKay gets the HC gig because they feel the program will sink lower than it is.

 

[AEB1989]

Hakeem was in his prime and Shaq was a very young player when the squared off. It's a bit dishonest not to acknowledge it. The Shaq that won three titles with the Lakers is unlike any beast in NBA history.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this one. I know Shaq was young when they squared off in the finals, but I don't think it would matter. Hakeem had so many more skills that even if both were in their prime, Shaq wouldn't have been able to hold Hakeem's jockstrap. I still think Hakeem is one of the most underrated nba players ever. Of course I'm a lifelong Rockets fan so that may have something to do with it.

Two good examples are Hakeem's dream shake and his ability to shoot free throws. Both those hallmarks of his game were added after his nba career started. I don't remember Shaq's game evolving like that, and he certainly could never shoot free throws.

I also think it's a crime the City of Houston or at least the Rockets haven't built a statue of him. Before the Astros World Series victory, Hakeem was directly responsible for the only major sports championships in H-town history.

 

[Ketchum]

We'll have to agree to disagree on this one. I know Shaq was young when they squared off in the finals, but I don't think it would matter. Hakeem had so many more skills that even if both were in their prime, Shaq wouldn't have been able to hold Hakeem's jockstrap. I still think Hakeem is one of the most underrated nba players ever. Of course I'm a lifelong Rockets fan so that may have something to do with it.

Two good examples are Hakeem's dream shake and his ability to shoot free throws. Both those hallmarks of his game were added after his nba career started. I don't remember Shaq's game evolving like that, and he certainly could never shoot free throws.

I also think it's a crime the City of Houston or at least the Rockets haven't built a statue of him. Before the Astros World Series victory, Hakeem was directly responsible for the only major sports championships in H-town history.

You don't think it would matter if it was the Shaq in his prime vs. Shaq as a very young player?

What do you think the Hakeem of 1993 would have done to the Hakeem of 1987?

 

[GQ03]

We'll have to agree to disagree on this one. I know Shaq was young when they squared off in the finals, but I don't think it would matter. Hakeem had so many more skills that even if both were in their prime, Shaq wouldn't have been able to hold Hakeem's jockstrap. I still think Hakeem is one of the most underrated nba players ever. Of course I'm a lifelong Rockets fan so that may have something to do with it.

Two good examples are Hakeem's dream shake and his ability to shoot free throws. Both those hallmarks of his game were added after his nba career started. I don't remember Shaq's game evolving like that, and he certainly could never shoot free throws.

I also think it's a crime the City of Houston or at least the Rockets haven't built a statue of him. Before the Astros World Series victory, Hakeem was directly responsible for the only major sports championships in H-town history.

I can understand that love for Hakeem and feeling that he is underrated as I feel the exact same way about Dirk as a Dallas fan. With that said, Shaq was a great player in Orlando but he was an absolute unstoppable force from about 2000-2004 with the Lakers. Shaq during that time period was even more dominant imo than Jordan or LeBron as outside of fouling there was literally nothing you could do to stop him and eventually your bigs would run out of fouls. For as much as Hakeem dominated Shaq in their 95 finals matchup it would be very different if Hakeem had to deal with THAT Shaq. This is similar to Chris Webber who feels that he was a better player than Dirk based off of their early 2000's matchups but Webber never faced prime Dirk of 2006-2013.

 

[Anwar Richardson]

- Texas definitely needs to load up on offensive and defensive linemen. It will be interesting to see how Tyler Johnson progresses once he steps on campus.

- You are right about the need to be stacked at certain positions, especially the QB room. Texas needs to get to a point where there are so many quality QBs, we hear rumors of guys wanting to transfer because of the lack of playing time.

- I agree with LeBron being No.2 on the list.

- You were optimistic about Houston. No way you could know Houston's shooters were going to punk out.

- LeBron in Philly next year makes a lot of sense.

- Hadn't heard Josh Freeman's name in years. I wonder when I'll hear it again?

 

[Ketchum]

- Texas definitely needs to load up on offensive and defensive linemen. It will be interesting to see how Tyler Johnson progresses once he steps on campus.

- You are right about the need to be stacked at certain positions, especially the QB room. Texas needs to get to a point where there are so many quality QBs, we hear rumors of guys wanting to transfer because of the lack of playing time.

- I agree with LeBron being No.2 on the list.

- You were optimistic about Houston. No way you could know Houston's shooters were going to punk out.

- LeBron in Philly next year makes a lot of sense.

- Hadn't heard Josh Freeman's name in years. I wonder when I'll hear it again?

a. I think Johnson will need a couple of years of development. Not sure he needs to be rushed onto the field.

b. Two game sevens won by the road team. That never happens.

c. LeBron in Houston makes a lot of sense, too.

 

[AEB1989]

You don't think it would matter if it was the Shaq in his prime vs. Shaq as a very young player?

What do you think the Hakeem of 1993 would have done to the Hakeem of 1987?

I may have mis-spoken. I meant to say if both were in their prime, I still think Dream would take Shaq to school. Now, if they had the refs from last night's game 7, anything could happen.