If we're going to create rules around the top 50 list according to us I'd like to suggest that a player can't make the list if he's been in the league less than 7 years. As wild as KD is right now i don't think he's top 50 if his career ended today. Thoughts?
Also are we ranking our top 50? This is where the real madness begins because the debate around Wilt vs Russell will rage on so maybe some criteria should be created around a debate between 2 players. Thoughts?
I don't agree, Shaq was named to the original list after only four years in the league. The minimum should be three years in the league. Positions or era don't matter. This just the list of the 50 greatest players ever. Also, no projecting, meaning if you vote for Rose it's cause you think he deserves it now and not what he could have been before the injury (which is thd main reason Bill Walton will not make my list).
ReplyDeleteI say that we go with a simple, un-ranked list for now. I would argue for a 5-year rule instead of 7.
ReplyDelete5 year rule it is then. I'm fine with that. Any other rules that we can think of? Also how are we actually posting the top 50. Do we take turns adding to the list?
ReplyDeleteHow do I post a blog? This blog post sucks a D. The rules are there are no rules. Welcome to Thunderdome.
ReplyDeleteI think 5 years should be the minimum term for the players. Anything less is just too small a sample size because guys that are going to be listed here will have mostly all played over 10 years and have established themselves as true superstars. Guys who have played less than 5 years just dont have the tenure (in my opinion) to show that they could sustain that greatness over a long stretch.
ReplyDeleteIts why Derrick Rose cant make this list. (Uh oh....I already started shit)