Hello there. It's been more than 5 years since I wrote anything here, and that was a one-off. I had a grand total of one piece in the last 9 years, before I started working full time for good. Fun! As you might guess, with the quarantine, I've had a lot of time on my hands. I know most of us have. I figured it's time to do at least one more mega-post with a lot of historical talk going on... [note - I started this in May and came back to finish some of the more recent notes after the season ended.]
The lack of live basketball [when it happened] has forced a lot of us to re-watch old games and do some deep dives on the past, all-time teams, who would you take, etc. Of course, the airing of
The Last Dance on ESPN [and then again on Netflix] has also brought back a lot of the talk about the 90s, the Dream Team, and a general state of the NBA beyond just Jordan's career. It's been a fun trip for those of us who were there, and hopefully eye opening for the youngsters.
I was 11 years old when Jordan retired in 1993. I had started really getting into basketball during that 92-93 season with all the excitement going on: the Bulls going for a three-peat; Shaq's insanely hyped rookie season; Barkley winning MVP (Chuck was my favorite player by far before I really understood basketball as a young kid, and I knew the Sixers were a mess, so him getting traded and then making the finals was a real treat); and trendy teams like the Sonics and Hornets rising up while the old guard Lakers and Celtics were struggling. It was a real boom time for the league, coming off the success of the Dream Team in the 92 Olympics, and I jumped right into it. Jordan's sudden retirement right before the 93-94 season actually made me even more interested, because I had seen Jordan as an unstoppable force and wanted some way for everyone else (mostly Barkley) to have a chance. So, from the 93-94 season on, I've been a rabid NBA watcher, and I can remember things since then as well as any near 40-year-old can.
Along with the Last Dance and talk about the 90s, Jordan's early career, and the Dream Team, there's been a lot of all-time lists getting made, what with basketball writers having nothing else to do. On top of that, the NBA website released an all-decade team for the past ten years earlier this year (
https://www.nba.com/all-decade-team-best-players-2010s) ... which is a little weird since these should technically end with the x9-x0 season? I guess they wanted to get this out sooner. Well, I've written casually (and once considered making it a profession) about the NBA since I was 12, so I decided to give my take on this and all the other history that's been going around.
In this post, I'm going to give my thoughts on all-decade teams, not just recent, but for all 4 decades I have been alive and watching. I didn't really know anything in the 80s when it was actually going on, but I have watched a ton of those games in post and I feel like I've studied enough there to at least give a take on it. I don't feel as strongly there, and I'm definitely not going to look into anything earlier, I am not enough of an expert for that. Then I'll give some thoughts on the Dream Team (which was also mostly before my real awareness time, but I know all their careers well) and overall Hall of Fame thoughts.
Now, for these teams, I didn't want to do it just on my memories and thoughts, I wanted to have some statistical backing on it. I am a believer in advanced stats, though I don't have a full grasp on them. I'd like to explain better how win shares and VORP work - I know what they mean, but I don't have a complete understanding on all the specifics. I do know they account for accumulated totals, and that kinda goes against my point here. I'm more interested in greatness... being very good over a long period of time is nice, and longevity is indeed important, but I like to see the guys who were among the best in the league on this list. I didn't want to do all-star teams because those can be fluky and are not always the best measure of success. Big awards like MVP, on the other hand, are very impressive butttttttttttttttt only a handful of guys get them.
The one thing that I think is a fair standard that has always been in place is the All-League Team. Every year, at the end of the year, pro writers vote on all-NBA teams, with 5 players on 3 levels. If you're going to be an all-timer, I would think you have to be considered one of the top 15 guys in the league at some point. So, I decided to go with a points system based on all-NBA teams within each decade. From the 00-01 season through the 09-00, I am tallying up points for every time a player was named to an all-league team. I'm also doing a weighted vote system: 5 points for a first team honor, 3 points for a second team, 1 point for a third team. Feels like this makes more sense than just going by 3,2,1 points. First-team all-league is a huge accomplishment, second team still means you are in the top 10 of players in the league. I would rather have guys that made a first team a few times than made the third team a bunch of times.
I should say, however, that this points system is not going to be the end-all of my thoughts. This is my own post with my own opinions, so I am leaning on those. I just thought this would be an interesting thought experiment to guide me. I was curious to see how this number system would work out.
Also, I am trying to keep decade teams true to actual decades, but I feel like they don't always perfectly match eras - sometimes there's a year or two of overlap. I should start the 80s era at 80-81 and end at 89-90, but then, the league really shifted during the 79-80 season since that was when Magic and Bird came in, instantly changing everything. So I'm giving points for that season under the 80s section. Also, I feel like the 90s were very different in the shortened season after the lockout and the following year... I wanted to make a whole thing from 99-2010, but that's a little much. So I am counting accolades from the 99-00 season as both 90s and 00s, and giving weight to the 99 lockout season as a personal decider for me. Just in case my math looks weird, I wanted to note that (we can call it the Webber-Iverson amendment for fun).
Now that we have this year's all-league team in the books, and another season is done, let's go. I'm going to start with this decade, since we just finished it. Here's how the point system for all-NBA works from 2010-11 through this season (cutting off at the top 25 or so):
POINTS SYTEM - 2010s
- LeBron 46
- Durant 39
- Harden 31
- Westbrook 27
- CP 25
- Steph 22
- AD 19
- Kawhi 18
- Giannis 16
- Kobe 15
- Lillard 15
- Dwight 14
- B Griffin 11
- Aldridge 9
- P George 9
- Parker 9
- M Gasol 8
- Jokic 8
- DeAndre Jordan 7
- Love 6
- Cousins 6
- P Gasol 6
- Embiid 6
- Wade 5
Sorry for the formatting, why am I still using blogger when I need to paste from excel, I don't know.
As we'd expect, LeBron is way ahead of the pack here, with only Durant even close to him. Seems right. Harden is solidly there, but notice that Russ and CP are ahead of the NBA's picks of Steph and Kawhi. Steph absolutely belongs on there, not even going to try to argue otherwise after that run (and I feel like he should have had an all-league and all-star nod before the Kerr era anyway), but I am hesitant to give that last spot to Kawhi just yet... he wasn't an all-star until midway through the decade, and even though he won finals MVP in 2014 that was a very balanced Spurs team. I did actually want him to get MVP in 2017 over Russ. Russ has been great for a long time, but the fact that he is a little older than them and started making teams at the beginning of the decade, and probably made a few 3rd teams (like this year, which is crazy) he didn't deserve, I think his numbers are inflated. Then again, you could say that about CP too, but he was truly fantastic for a long time and I think he should be closer to Harden. I'm giving it to the Point God.
LEO ALL DECADE TEAM TEENS: LeBron, Durant, Harden, Steph, CP
Now I think I should do 3 teams for each decade, since they did in their list and we have 3 all-league teams each year. Russ and Kawhi were close cuts so they definitely make the second team. I think Anthony Davis, especially with this year, has proven enough that he can win with another good player, so he's good. He's actually ahead of Kawhi in the points system and for more all-star games. After that, we have a couple of choices between guys who were great at the beginning of the decade and fell off (Kobe, Dwight, Blake) and guys who have come on in the last few years (Giannis, Lillard though I guess he's been here for a while). Lillard always seems to get dissed by writers and should probably be a little higher; Kobe, I have to say, got by on reputation far longer than his game was good. Dwight has the problem that I can see with a number of guys in that his best years are at the end of one decade and the beginning of another. He was truly great earlier this decade and I feel like his 00's numbers are going to be softer behind a lot of big guys. Giannis is truly great now, though, and got the MVP twice when Dwight could not.
SECOND TEAM TEENS: Russ, Kawhi, A Davis, Lillard, Giannis
For the third team, I do think Blake's excellence at the beginning of the decade is worth it, and he did have a good year in Detroit before injuries happened. Same with Dwight, who just missed out. I am kinda surprised at the high numbers for LaMarcus Aldridge, but I suppose that's from being solid all decade. He made a 2nd team recently which seems way out of line. Meanwhile, Paul George was also pretty good all decade and would have probably been higher if not for that horrible injury. I also think that Melo (who is way lower on points here) should get something for his early Knicks years, before they went horribly wrong. He was a close MVP call in 2013 and he kept up the numbers through most of the decade... he probably deserves more for last decade, but I am guessing that he won't be high there either.
In this number range we also have Tony Parker, who was imperative for the Spurs rejuvenating themselves in the early part of the decade; Marc Gasol, who was the backbone of those Grizzlies teams that had a nice run; Nikola Jokic, who is fast approaching best true center in the game status; and DeAndre, who got this mostly by making first team center when there weren't a lot of true centers. Parker was very important for the Spurs resurgence in the first half of the decade, and I think he gets a little forgotten.
I should give two spots on memorial for Kobe & Dirk, who both had a few very good years early on but fell apart by midway through the decade.
THIRD TEAM TEENS: Dwight, Blake Griffin, Paul George, Tony Parker, Melo (Dirk & Kobe memorial)
Some notable snubs (in points order)
LaMarcus Aldridge - always good, never great, turned down a good situation in Portland for a dream that never came...
Marc Gasol - also very good but hard to say great. I think he kept getting things because they wanted someone from Memphis to finally make it. Weird that Mike Conley never got any awards or all-stars.
Jokic - he's getting there. He'll be on the next decade team.
DeAndre Jordan - we'll see this more, but in the last 15 years, there have been a number of questionable spots awarded to centers just because they needed one for position rules. He only made one all-star game!
Kevin Love - deserves some recognition for his Minnesota years (when they were really not that bad and missed the playoffs in a tough year) and for being a solid second option in Cleveland, but just not going to make this.
Boogie Cousins - surprised he does have this much recognition at all, but I guess they softened on him. One of the better talents but just could not get it all together.
Pau Gasol - seems like he should be a lot higher. I would consider him for the third team honestly. I think he also had the poor luck to have best years in between decades, and was overlooked when he got to LA. Kobe's legacy is not nearly the same without him, but we don't think of Pau much.
Embiid - hoping he'll be on the next decade...
Wade - his best years were technically last decade, and once LeBron got there, the accolades stopped... even though he was still a top 10 guy for the first few years.
D Rose - a great two years and then it was over. He's come back to being serviceable, but nothing like that. It is rare that we wouldn't look at an MVP, but there is just not enough to go on.
Kyrie - he's certainly had one of the most memorable decades, for various reasons...
Jimmy Butler - he should have been second team this year, and his playoff performance showed it. Still, his resume is not that great...
Klay - the points system is unkind to him. Being the second-best part of a great team should get you more!
Draymond Green - same story.
Rondo - his re-appearance in the finals has caused some people to bring the hall again. I don't think so. Though he has been great defensively, he's made one all-league team, a third team in 2012. He made 4 all-star teams before forcing his way out and since then he's struggled to adjust to the increased emphasis in shooting.
In short, I think you can throw out a lot of centers this decade because they're getting a lot of help from voters who still think you need one. I do feel that Wade and Pau were forgotten by this system, and the Golden State guys were overlooked, but I think the 3 teams I have are good.
Let's move on to the last decade and see how the numbers stack up...
POINTS SYSTEM - 2000s
1.
Kobe 472.
Duncan 443.
Shaq 364.
Nowitzki 345.
KG 306.
LeBron 267.
Kidd 237.
Nash 239.
McGrady 2110.
Iverson 2011.
Wade 1712.
Dwight 1613.
Amare 1414.
Webber 1215.
BWallace 1116.
Yao 917.
CP 818.
Pierce 618.
Melo 618.
Der Williams 621.
J O'Neal 521.
Billups 521.
Arenas 5 24. VCarter 4
24. R Allen 4
A lot here is not that surprising. I expected Kobe and Duncan to be way ahead, and Shaq and KG would be in the top five. I'm a little surprised that Dirk is this high - I knew he made lots of all-star games but I didn't think he'd have the all-league support.
I'm not always going for a true starting lineup - I want the best five - but I like to have positions considered if they were important, and here I think we need some guards as they started to have more importance. I was already expecting to have Kobe with a big frontline of Shaq, Duncan, and KG in my top 5 for sure. The other guard spot I figured would go to either Kidd or Nash, who had similar careers I guess... and wouldn't you know it, they're tied in points. I figured LeBron would have to settle for second team although he's pretty high here too. There are no terrible choices here.
Let's look at Kidd vs. Nash - they're replaced each other a few times between Dallas and Phoenix. Kidd has two final appearances, but Nash has two MVPs. I don't feel like he should have, but then those finals were also in bad eastern conferences. I think we call this a tie for the last spot.
LEO ALL DECADE TEAM AUGHTS: Kobe, Duncan, Garnett, Kidd (tie), Nash (tie)
For the second team, Dirk and LeBron are easy picks and honestly could have made the first team without any issue by me. Slightly below LeBron on the points chart are Iverson and McGrady, who put up big scoring numbers but are often criticized for not winning anything. I think they did more than enough, and were great for an entire decade. I am balancing this out with the inclusion of Wade, who is a little lower on points but did win a title and was a top five or six guy by the end of the decade.
SECOND TEAM AUGHTS: Nowitzki, LeBron, McGrady, Iverson, Wade
The third team has some big divides between the early part and late parts of the decade. In the early part of the decade there was Chris Webber being a real force before injuries, Ben Wallace overachieving (more on these guys later) to become a multiple all-star and Defensive Player of the Year, and Vince Carter rising to stardom before souring on the Raptors. In the later half, guys like Dwight, CP, and Melo rose to near MVP level. Then there are steady performers throughout the decade like Paul Pierce and Ray Allen, along with Amare, who has a decent point total. Yao Ming also had some really good years before injuries, although his all-star numbers are a bit inflated because of his popularity in Asia.
This is one time where I have to question the all-league points. You see, they listed Duncan as a forward for most of his career, while still keeping a center on every team. After the heyday of the 90's, it wasn't always evenly divided to keep a true center on all three teams. Duncan should have been listed there, but he wasn't, and that hurts guys like Webber and Melo, while helping Wallace and Amare (who should have been listed at at forward).
Well, I want greatness over consistency when I have to make a decision. I know Webber was fantastic when he was healthy and so he has to be in. Dwight, like I said earlier, was a top guy at the very end of the decade. I do think Ben Wallace has enough to stay. I am giving a spot to Melo since I didn't in this decade - I think he was a little better here. My last spot goes to Ray Allen, who doesn't have a ton of points and is more of a solid consistent performer, but I feel like he was also overshined a bit.
THIRD TEAM AUGHTS: Webber, Dwight, Ben Wallace, Melo, Ray Allen
Notable snubs (in points order):
Amare - it's still dumb that he was treated as a center when Duncan was still listed as a forward. He was a couple league teams that shouldn't be. Marion is way below him in points even though I think he was just as key to those Suns teams, and of course Nash was the true linchpin there. Amare was indeed a force and had a good year in New York too, but he's just not on the level as the rest here.
Yao - injuries to him and McGrady robbed us of a good team, one that could have challenged the Lakers at the end of the decade. Alas. Yao also probably benefitted from the true center rule, although he was still very good when healthy.
CP - by the end of the decade he was starting to show dominance, but he wasn't drafted until 05 and had some bad teams in New Orleans. I'd feel worse but since I have him first next decade, not going to worry about it.
Pierce - I'll have more to say about him later, but he benefits from that 2008 season a lot, and his years before were always good, never great, and the Celtics were up and down all decade before Garnett and Allen (better players, I am saying) were brought in. Melo was much better as the centerpoint of a team, for sure - the Celtics could not just build around Pierce.
Vince Carter - was on the cusp of being great early in the decade, but then got into whatever with the Raps. He came back with some big years on the Nets and one at the end with Orlando, but his points overall are not great and that is telling.
That's about it; the rest are guys who had some brief moments but definitely don't belong in any decade-long discussion. Let's go to my introductory era..
POINTS SYSTEM - 1990s
1.
KMalone 45
2.
DRobinson 30
3.
Pippen 23
4.
Stockton 22
5.
Olajuwon 21
5.
Payton 21
7.
Barkley 20
8.
Shaq 14
8.
THardaway 14
8.
GHill 14
11.
Ewing 12
12.
Richmond 11
12.
PHardaway 11
14.
Kemp 9
14.
Drexler 9
16.
Mourning 8
16.
M Price 8
16.
Mullin 8
19. Dom Wilkins 7
19.
K Johnson 7
21.
Dumars 5
21.
Sprewell 5
21.
Kidd 5
Two notes: I'm not including Jordan because honestly, why subject him to it. He is the top guy here and should be the points leader (but obviously missed two years). We know he's first. I am also not including Duncan who got some weird voting factors in his favor in the last few years and would throw it off. He and Garnett should be more factored on the next decade team anyway.
So, looking at the points, we have a starting lineup that I think many would expect for this decade: Jordan, Malone, Robinson, Pippen, and Stockton. Jordan and Malone I can't argue with (I will maintain that Barkley was better than Malone at his peak and never had a guy setting him up like Stockton, but the longevity and finals appearances makes it a fairly easy call), but the rest I think merit some discussion.
At center, there is the question of Robinson vs. Olajuwon. Robinson has the points, but Olajuwon has the titles (as the key piece of a team), and the head-to-head matchup in 1995 pretty much solved it. Robinson didn't always have talent around him, but he probably had more at various points than Olajuwon did in '94 when he won it all.
At point guard, Stockton is just one point ahead of Gary Payton. I do feel like Payton was better in his prime and the '96 conference finals showed it; he also got shafted on a couple all-league teams (in '96 he lost out to Penny in a controversial vote, and then the next year he lost out to a Tim Hardaway rejuvenation story). But Stockton has been questioned so much that I feel he's almost become underrated, and he of course should get more credit for Malone's success and the Jazz being a consistent threat through the decade (besides the two finals, they also made the conference finals 3 times). He was a great defender too, without nearly as much recognition as Payton. It's a little unfair as Payton reached his peak at the end of the decade, and would have probably been the clear favorite if he came along like 2 years earlier, but I'll give Stockton the nod.
I know it doesn't make for as smooth of a team, but I think Barkley does deserve discussion as the other forward besides Pippen. Barkley has an MVP and led the Suns to probably the biggest challenge the Bulls ever had in the finals. But his years after that were not as great, and Pippen stayed dominant longer. He also had a monster season when Jordan went out. I will concede to Pippen on longer staying power.
LEO ALL DECADE TEAM 90s: Jordan, Karl Malone, Olajuwon, Pippen, Stockton
So Robinson, Payton, and Barkley are locks for the second team. There are a number of guys next up grouped close together in points. Shaq and Ewing are close together, and they had the misfortune of coming into a decade with great centers (Alonzo Mourning is probably going to struggle here too). Tim Hardaway has a surprisingly good profile here, though as I said, his first team selection in '97 was a little puzzling. Penny Hardaway also has a decent amount, though some of that is dubious too. I like Mitch Richmond, who should have been on the first team in the years Jordan was gone and got overlooked in Sacramento. There is also Grant Hill, who was fantastic before getting hurt and overtook Pippen late in the decade as the star wing forward. I'm keeping a somewhat realistic lineup here.
SECOND TEAM 90s: D Robinson, Barkley, Payton, Richmond, Grant Hill
Ewing and Shaq should be tied for the last center spot, they both were very good but just didn't have the overall success of the other big men here. Both Hardaways should make it at the guard spots - still feel like they made some first teams they should not have, but at this level, I do think it's fair. If KJ or Mark Price hadn't been hurt so much they might be here. Reggie Miller deserves some praise too, but I never saw him as a complete player like Penny was for a stretch. I am giving the big forward spot to Kemp, who was awesome for a couple years and just couldn't unseat Malone and Pippen to make an all-league team. I'll talk more about this later but it's a shame the Reign Man is not in the hall of fame. I considered him getting the second team spot over Hill, but Hill had more good years later and Kemp both started late and fell apart early. The last spot, since I'm considering Shaq and Ewing as ties, goes to Clyde Drexler, who was the second best big guard to Michael Jordan for a while and a worthy Dream Teamer.
THIRD TEAM 90s: Ewing (tie), Shaq (tie), Kemp, Penny Hardaway, Tim Hardaway, Drexler
Notable snubs in points order:
Alonzo Mourning - if he had been 5 years younger and/or didn't have health issues, we might be regarding him in the Duncan / KG stratosphere, but he came in at the same time as Shaq and just didn't get noticed as much as all the other centers. He did get some accolades at the end of the decade and probably should have been third team in a normal world.
Mark Price - easy to forget that Price was once seen as possibly a challenger to Stockton as the best pure point guard (and beat out Stockton for first team in '93). Injuries killed his career, and the Cavs had great teams that just couldn't get past the Bulls, so we don't think about him much, but he was basically Steve Nash early version. I thought about him for third team guard; if he came back from his injuries like Tim H did, he might be ahead of him.
Chris Mullin - a probably-but-not-totally deserving Dream Teamer (more on that later), Mullin started out the decade super hot and then injuries also stalled his career, and then the Warriors fell apart by the time he made it back. He should have been the second team small forward and would be great in today's game, but I can't put him here with all those lost years.
Dominque Wilkins - 'Nique was basically finished after '94, but his first few years of the decade were still very good. He'll be higher in the 80's rankings.
Kevin Johnson - much like Price, KJ had a great start to the decade and fell victim to injuries. He won't get recognition in these because his prime was really just late 80's and early 90's, but young KJ was also a fierce contender for best upcoming guard. He lost some notice after Barkley got to Phoenix too.
Joe Dumars - another guy who might be overlooked a bit because his best years were at the end of one decade / beginning of another, but Dumars was always good and was the second scorer on a very good (albeit unconventional) championship team, then transitioned to being a helpful veteran when Grant Hill came in. He's a hard guy to place in the big picture, but he has the HOF nod, which is deserved.
Mutombo - see Mourning. Just could not get recognition with all those centers, though he managed to get in the all-star game quite a bit.
Glen Rice - I loved Rice and thought he was consistently underrated, but I can't say he is any better than guys above him. He'd be a solid wing today.
Reggie Miller - I didn't like him as a player or TV guy, but I do recognize that Reggie deserves more credit and would absolutely kill it today. His points totals are bad, and he didn't even actually make that many all-star games. But he was one of the better wings of the decade, had some great playoff moments, and was the key catalyst on several strong teams. I still think Richmond was the better player and Reggie got too much attention, but Reg probably suffered in accolades because he didn't get a lot of traditional stats and that's unfair too.
Rodman - low on points despite lots of individual awards (and he even made some all-star games early in the decade for the Pistons). Rodman is one of the more memorable guys, and probably could be considered as one of the best, but he specialized too much for me.
Let's finish this off with the 80's - I won't spend too much time on this one.
POINTS SYSTEM - 1980s
1. Bird 43
2. Magic 43
3. MosMalone 23
3. MJ 23
5. Isiah 22
7. Barkley 21
9. Erving 18
10. Moncrief 17
11. Gervin 13
11. KMalone 13
11. B
King 13
14. Wilkins 12
15. Ewing 11
15. Marq
Johnson 11
17. English 9
17. Stockton 9
19. Dennis
Johnson 8
20. Dantley 6
20. Wa
Davis 6
20. Chambers 6
20. Gus
Williams 6
24. McHale 5
25. Parish 4
It is perfectly fitting that Magic and Bird end up tied with the most points, as they defined the decade and were truly a duo that saved the NBA. They're far ahead and they should be. I am also DELIGHTED that Moses is ahead of Kareem, as I was planning to put him there anyway - he got the better of them every time they faced up, and it's not his fault the Sixers blew that and then traded him away too early. Kareem would be the first guy on the all 70's team anyway, if I was doing that.
The other two spots have a lot of contention with the points system. I can't overlook Jordan for the first team, despite all his team success coming in the 90's - he was the best player in the league for the second half of this decade and could have won more MVPs if the team was better. I also think Isiah Thomas deserves it for a long decade of individual success and then giving that up a little at the end to win two titles (nearly three). This is a fun hypothetical team, with four playmakers around Moses... although Jordan and Bird wouldn't talk to Isiah.
LEO ALL DECADE TEAM 80s: Magic, Bird, Jordan, Moses Malone, Isiah Thomas
The second team has a lot of power as well. Right after Kareem we have Barkley and Olajuwon again, who would of course be better in the 90's. Then there's Dr. J, Sidney Moncrief, an older George Gervin, a young Karl Malone, and prominent wings in Bernard King and Dominique. I like Barkley, who was a near MVP by '90 and was putting up some insane numbers by 1987 or so. Olajuwon was very good early on, but didn't really have great teams after that and nearly forced his way out before turning it around in the early 90's. I'll give him a third team spot. Dr. J was finished by 1987 but he was still going strong until then, and did win MVP very early in the decade. I think 'Nique is slightly underrated and the Hawks were very good in the late 80's but could not do anything in a loaded East. Moncrief was also a key part of Bucks teams who were also overlooked by that strong East. I think we have a forward-centric team to support all the guards on the upper level.
SECOND TEAM 80s: Kareem, Barkley, Dr. J, Sidney Moncrief, Dominque
For the third team, we have all those guys mentioned earlier, plus a young Stockton, and super scoring wings in Alex English and Marques Johnson. I had to learn more about Johnson after seeing that MJ had a poster of him - he was also part of those good Milwaukee teams and was the first person to fall victim to the Clipper Curse. Gervin, most known as an ABA star, still had some really good early years in the 80's and the Spurs were good. English was a big scorer for Nuggets teams that had some success in the mid decade.
Even though he is low on the points system, I think Kevin McHale should get a nod for being the 2 guy on the Celts for a while, and was always overshadowed by Bird. He'll get the last spot over Malone and Johnson.
THIRD TEAM 80s: Olajuwon, Bernard King, Gervin, Alex English, McHale
Notable snubs (in points order):
Karl Malone - was just starting to cook during this time. He got the all 90's spot and the Dream Team so whatever.
Marques Johnson - injuries killed a criminally overlooked career. Still had a decent amount of success.
Ewing - he was better in the 90's, and was still behind Olajuwon for this stretch.
Stockton - didn't really come on until late in the decade.
Dennis Johnson - has a decent showing and probably could have been higher, but he sacrificed accolades to be the steady point guard for great Celtics teams. He was a key member of the Sonics in their late 70's run.
Adrian Dantley - another big scorer who is probably best known for getting out of Detroit right before they became a beast.
Walter Davis - I didn't really know much about him, but he was always solid. A star on the Suns in their quietly good early 80's run.
Tom Chambers - known now for his killer move in the first EA NBA game. A really great scorer who had a terrific run at the end of the decade, but just wasn't enough.
Gus Williams - like DJ, a big part of the Sonics who had some good years in the early part of the decade. Again, a victim of being between decades.
Robert Parish - gets a lot of recognition for being always good and lasting a long time, but never the best or most talented guy. He got the HOF nod, so whatever.
James Worthy - despite being probably the second best player on the Lakers in the later half of the decade, Worthy never got much league recognition. All-star games for sure, and he made the HOF, but he just hasn't stacked up enough here.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, that's my end for the all-decade teams. There's a lot more I wanted to talk about during the year, so I'm putting these down in sections.
THE DREAM TEAM DISCOURSE
One of the historical moments brought up during The Last Dance was the selection process for the Dream Team, the famous USA basketball team during the 1992 Olympics. This has been covered to death so I know you know all the details; I'm just going to give my take: yes, Isiah (and Nique!) got screwed.
I won't debate the idea of having Christian Laettner on the team - they said they wanted a college player, and if they were holding that spot for anyone, it would be him. It doesn't make sense any other way - they definitely didn't need another big man with Ewing, Robinson, Barkley, and Malone there (quick aside - Olajuwon was more qualified than everyone here except maybe Barkley but he wasn't technically a US citizen then, so no need to go into that, and eventually they welcomed him in 1996 after he was). Though there had been some college stars who translated well into the NBA, no one had the level of fame and accolade on the college level like he did. If they were indeed set on a college guy, at that time, there was really no other choice.
So, with that aside, there's still a lot of questions. Let's look at the decisions that were made in the summer of 1991 - that's when the first team was announced of 10 players, with them leaving 2 spots open for after the 91-92 season. Jordan was the obvious big catch for them to make this team happen. He was the best player in the league, had been for a few years, and was just on another level in terms of popularity. Magic and Bird were more legacy guys, and since they helped saved the NBA in the 80s, they had to be there. I cannot argue any of that, even if Magic was technically retired and Bird was pretty much there. They were two of the best ever. Barkley to me was an easy choice, as he had nearly won MVP in 1990 and was possibly second to Jordan in terms of popularity. He'd been on the all-league first team the past 4 years. The Mailman was right behind him with 3 straight appearances. There was no one else who would merit attention at power forward. At center, with Olajuwon not eligible, Ewing was an easy choice. He'd been first team all-league a few times already, and was jsut behind Olajuwon on a few more. Robinson had just started but had already established himself as a superstar and finished ahead of Ewing for the 91 first team. I don't have an issue with those two at center. (If this was 1984 or even 1988 I would talk about Moses, but at this point, it wasn't gonna happen).
The guards and wings outside of the legendary three of Magic, Michael, and Larry, however? I think there were some questions here, and while the final choices make sense in retrospect, in 1991 I feel like they should have been more debatable. Here's a chart to show the all-league teams in those years...
Though he had quieted down in personal accolades at this point, there is absolutely no way that Isiah Thomas should have missed out. Zeke had been an all-star 10 times at that point, and had been a regular first team all-league selection before Jordan starting taking that spot. He was the best player and catalyst on two champions. He was still probably one of the better guards outside of Magic and Michael. As I noted in the 80's team section, he was right behind the big three of Jordan-Magic-Bird, and while he was never as popular, he was considered the best small guard in the league and a top 5-10 guy for most of the 80s. No other guard that was selected or considered behind Jordan and Magic had a better profile, not even close to it, but he got denied
John Stockton got the only point guard spot behind Magic, which seems obvious now (excepting Isiah). He became the all time leader in assists eventually, and was a steady hand for a long time for a successful franchise. But he wasn't the only rising star point guard at the time. In 1991, Stockton had made 3 all-league second teams and 3 all-star games, so that's solid. But at that point, Kevin Johnson was also making news. KJ had also made 3 all-league second teams and 2 (which should have been 3) all-star games, and was instrumental in the Suns reaching two conference finals. The Jazz, meanwhile, hadn't really had any postseason success yet. Mark Price was also coming on for the Cavs, who were now the top contender in the East to the Bulls, with a couple all-star games (Price would beat out Stockton for the 93 first league team). Though he was much younger, Tim Hardaway was also starting to get noticed too. In the end, Stockton was probably the best pick out of these (but again, not near Isiah at that point).
Chris Mullin and Scottie Pippen were both selected in the first run, and Clyde Drexler was selected after the 91-92 season. Interestingly, I think Drexler actually had the best profile among all of them, but he had to wait. Drexler was probably the second-best off guard in the league then, although there was a big gap between Jordan and everyone else. He'd been an all-star a number of times and had made a couple second team all-league selections, and the Blazer had made 2 final appearances in 3 years. He was a solid pick and if they wanted to have another true scoring guard, he was really the only one. (Joe Dumars could have merited some discussion after a very nice run winning two titles with the Pistons, but to have him and not Isiah would be really weird).
Pippen and Mullin, however, were a little more controversial. Pippen making the first cut especially stands out - again, it makes sense now, but at that time in 1991, Pippen had a total of one all-star game, no league teams, and a second team all-defensive nod. It was clear he was a rising star and the right complement to Jordan as they'd just won their first title, but his resume was really empty then. If he had been the choice after a year later I think it would have made more sense (he got a few more accolades and a second title). But to have him on the first 10 and not Isiah is pretty obvious Jordan appeasement, whether anyone will ever admit it.
Mullin at least had some success in those years leading up. He'd been an all-star the past three years, made second all-league team twice, and the Warriors were considered a hot rising team (they'd actually have a really good season in 91-92 and he would make first team all-league, justifying it a little more after the fact). Neither of them, however, had the profile of Dominique Wilkins (to note, he was older and had a few seasons on both of them). Nique was one of the more popular players in the 80s after some dunk contest showdowns with Jordan, and he had the awards too. He'd made 6 straight all-star games at that point, along with one first team all-league and three second teams. He'd finished in the top 10 voting for MVP four times, including second to Bird in 86. He was the leading scorer in the league before Jordan starting dominating, and then was often second to MJ. The Hawks, believe it or not, had some real good teams in the late 80's, but they couldn't get past the Celtics and Pistons and thus never got much attention.
I guess the rationale that Wilkins, who was 31 at the time of the first selection, was maybe too old and on his way down? At that time, it was common for guys to decline or be finished by age 30. The Hawks had slipped and were not great in 90 and 91, so maybe that hurt his case, even though he continued to put up numbers (and would for another few years). They could say that Mullin was good but still young and upcoming, and provided shooting, and Pippen had a bright future and could play several positions, and that's true, but if they wanted a team of true stars, they absolutely should have had Nique. I would take him over all the non-Jordan wings and Stockton too, probably.
[Note I have to address: was there a racial element for Stockton and Mullin? I can't rule it out. They were great and certainly understandable to be contenders then; it is not like these are outrageous choices. There isn't a ton of precedent, as previous teams with mostly college players didn't always subdue to that and later Olympic teams would not, for sure. It's just kind of conspicuous that the way things shook out, the first Olympic team with pro players - a very important historical and iconic team used to spread basketball throughout the world - ended up having four white guys when maybe two or three would not have made it if they straight up took the best 12 guys in the league. I don't know but I think it is worth talking about.]
So yeah... Nique and Isiah should have been in. They'd easily be my my top ten of stars selected at that time. The fact that Pippen made it on the first cut and Isiah was completely excluded makes it pretty clear to me this was Jordan appeasement (Bird and a few other guys didn't like him either, so that had to help). Given that they were determined to have a college spot, the rest of the roster from both a logical standpoint and getting the biggest stars would have made more sense with those two involved. Then Pippen as the x factor that could play multiple positions, and Laettner in that college spot, would have made sense. I would then have Mullin and Drexler as alternates (so both Stockton and Isiah would be the backup guards), but I guess they were instructed to only have 12 total. (To note, both Stockton and Magic got hurt during the early rounds, so they ended up using Pippen and Jordan as the main ballhandlers, so they could have used another point... except it didn't matter because they were killing everyone by like 50 anyway). They tried to appease ignoring the Pistons and their recent success by having Chuck Daly as the coach of the team.
It is a shame it didn't work out like that. To possibly soothe things over, Isiah, Nique, Dumars, and some of the young guys who were looked at against Stockton (KJ, Price, Tim Hardaway) were all promised to be on the next international team, which took place in 1994. By that time, Isiah had retired, a lot of the other guys were injured, and that team ended up being more of a showcase for young stars (Shaq, Kemp, Zo, LJ, Reggie). It wasn't quite as cool as being part of the Dream Team, which we're still talking about today. Alas.
Some other random thoughts I have....
GUYS WHO SHOULD BE IN THE HALL OF FAME (ELIGIBLE AND HAVE NOT)
Shawn Kemp - yes, he sulked after the Sonics signed McIlvaine and his last few years were a sad afterthought of what he once was. His career numbers thus are not amazing. Still, from 93-98 he was a top 10 guy and possibly the best player on a team that won 64 games and made the finals. I think pretty much everyone agrees he should have made the 1996 Olympic team over Barkley, but the organizers panicked and wanted more marketability. I don't get why voters are punishing him for that end of his career when he had a much better pro resume than a lot of guys that are in.. since he did not play college ball, and the HOF is a combination of pro and college, that could be a factor. But that shouldn't count.
Chris Webber - was a top 5-7 guy for a decent stretch (99-04) and was close for MVP a few times. Injuries kept taking their toll, and he didn't have a great fit in Washington, but he was still really good during those years. It's interesting to me that, since the HOF does include college time, his two great years with the Fab Five aren't pushing him over the line, and I do wonder if the scandal that was found out are making people question that college time (WHICH IS DUMB. COLLEGE GUYS GET MONEY ALL THE TIME. WE KNOW THIS NOW. IT DOES NOT INVALIDATE WHAT HE DID THERE!!!). Also, I think there's a perception that he was a bit of a letdown after so much hype coming in, and yeah, he maybe was a bit of a disappointment compared to that, but he was still really good, injuries caused a lot of that, and when he put it together in Sacramento it was awesome. He also put up a decent awards / accolades collection despite being behind Malone, Barkley, and Kemp early in his career, and Duncan & Garnett during his prime.
GUYS WHO MIGHT THAT I HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT
Vince Carter - finally retired this year after 22 years, which is insane to think about. He's probably going to make it based on the longevity and I have a lot of issues with that, but he did have moments where he looked like he was a top 10 guy, if not there yet then he soon would be. His first few years in Toronto were fantastic and he almost got the Raptors to the conference finals in 2001, when he made second team all-league and seemed like he was going to be a superstar for years to come.
Then he got hurt, had some issues with Toronto management, and forced his way out (in a way that was really ugly at the time - we will see if that comes up). Then he had a nice run with the Nets with Kidd, who were good but not finals-level good anymore, then had one good year with Orlando where they almost made the finals, then after that was pretty much done as an impact player. So that on its own would not have been probably hall-worthy, but then he surprised everyone by recommitting himself to defense and accepting a bench role, and he ended up playing another FULL DECADE almost, which is wild. Those last 9 years of mostly bench work have pushed up his all-time numbers and put him on a path to where it's highly expected he will be in.
Aside from the all-time numbers, I don't think he really deserves it. So much of his early stardom was predicated on him becoming something great, and his first few years were on track for that, and then his Nets years were very good, but I don't know if I would say the career was great overall. He only made 2 all-league teams (a third and a second) and finished top ten in MVP voting only once, that stellar year in 2001. He made a ton of all-star games because of his popularity early on and I feel like half of those weren't really warranted, though he did make a few with the Nets after his popularity had waned a bit so I guess that's something. Anyway, I feel like it's going to happen and if Webber still isn't in by then someone should ask every voter why his misdeeds are worse than what Vince did to the Raptors.
Pau Gasol - he's not eligible yet but I have a feeling he will make it when he is. Along with including college in the equation, the HOF also includes international play as well. This is why many expect Ginobli to make it - for his stellar play on the Argentina team as well as his NBA career. Pau will probably get a boost for the strong showing of the Spanish national team last decade, and that's fine. I mostly agree with this, I just think his NBA career is not at the level of the guys I mentioned above who haven't gotten in. Yes, I am still angry about that trade that got him to the Lakers, and it's certainly helping his case that he got to go from an actually ok team that no one paid attention to, to the most storied franchise in the league and helped them win 2 more titles. He also has a longer career than maybe we remember, and his kinda-comeback seasons in Chicago helped to boost his accolades and numbers. He's top 40 in points all-time and everyone else on that list is in. But he was never a true MVP candidate and I never really regarded him as a top-10 guy... top 15, yes, but I think he benefitted from a time when Shaq had just left, Duncan was hurt or regressing to a new level, and Dwight was the only real big man threat ahead of him.
Carmelo Anthony - speaking of all-time scorers, Melo is 15 on that list with some pretty big names in his company. Unlike Vince, he didn't adjust well to being a role player, but he's still put up scoring numbers when he has played, so he's been able to creep up the list for a long time. I have a lot of mixed feelings, as most do, but I think I'm fine if he gets in. There were years from 08-13 where he was definitely a top 10-15 guy, and he had some MVP moments in Denver and then that one great year in New York, where he finished third (but never made a first team all-league). There will be a lot of complaining - yes he hasn't been great defensively, yes he forced his way out of Denver just as they had built a really good team for him, and yes I feel like that great Knicks year feels like a fluke the more we get away from it... but also the Knicks made a bunch of terrible decisions after that. His international work with the Olympic teams (he's always been great there for whatever reason) will almost certainly help his case. I think he gets it and I am curious to see how this affects other borderline guys.
Paul Pierce - and right behind Melo on the scoring list is Pierce, which was a little surprising to me as his last few years he fell off a bit, but I guess he had enough big-scoring early years with the Celts to get there. His case obviously changed a lot when the Celts got KG and Allen to transform themselves into contenders; before that, he was a frequent all-star on teams that made the playoffs but were never real contenders (that 02 conference finals came in one of the weakest conferences I can remember). He's only made second team all-league once and been top 10 in MVP once (both in 09 where he got a bump from KG being hurt for a big part of it). He's really just living off that Finals MVP way more than anyone should be. Otherwise I feel like he wouldn't have a great case, but that and him staying around long enough (and yes, the Celtics were contenders after 2008 for a few more years so that helps) are putting him in a position now where I have a feeling he would get in. Allen did, and Pierce has probably got a better profile (though I still think Allen was the better player).
Ben Wallace - if Mutombo can make it with a similar profile, I think he should be in. I could also make the comparison with Rodman, though he was even more dominant in his prime and it took him a while to get in. A classic overachiever who maximized his strengths and played on a team that didn't need him for offense, Wallace was so overlooked at first, and then writers kinda overcorrected in praise when Detroit became good that some view him as overrated now, and yes he benefitted from a lack of true centers. But it's hard to ignore someone with multiple DPOY awards and a couple all-league selections. I think there are also going to be a lot of big men in the next decade (like Gobert) who are going to be judged on mostly defensive metrics.
Dwight Howard - here's a tale of many different careers. His rise in Orlando should be enough, but then the way he forced out of there and the failure with the Lakers (and eventually a lot of places) makes him look bad. Now, with him winning a title, a lot of people have suddenly turned back around and said he could be in. It's nice, but honestly, he should be an easy yes already. He lasted longer in his peak than some flameout guys of late (Vince, D Rose, Deron Williams) with five straight top-7 MVP performances. That's huge. For this decade, most have forgotten about him, but he had good years in Houston and he had one ok year in Atlanta before they realized they should just rebuild. Even though I don't love long-term stats, he is top 15 ALL TIME in rebounds and blocks, which is really good when you consider how many big men have hung around for long careers. Now that he seems to have gotten into the groove of being a defensive role guy and not focus on post ups, he'll probably have a few more ok years too.
--------
I think that's all the rants I wanted to get off this year. Who knows what the next decade will look like with the changing environment in both the country at large and the basketball world now. Giannis just re-upped in Milwaukee for the max, so he should be having a strong few years (but he could always get out of it). Zion, Luka Doncic, DeAaron Fox, Devin Booker, both Jaren Jackson Jr. and Ja Morant in Memphis, and more have already established themselves and will be faces to watch, and there will be more to come. There's always a group of guys ready to be next. They survived the post-Jordan era and they will live after LeBron too. Maybe in another ten years I'll pop in and post something, if we're not all on fire or under water.
Enjoy!
