Top 50 Players All-Time, Part 1: #50 to 35
September 13, 2012 | By: Zachariah Blott 
Legends Rick Barry (with ball) and Oscar Robertson (right) both possessed extraordinary skill sets, but both players also upset most of their teammates and ultimately had questionable connections to their clubs' W-L records.
After having evaluated the top players historically at each position (C, PF, SF, SG, PG), it's time to put it all together and try to create one list. As I've stated before, the key thing I'm looking for is a player's ability to improve his team's odds of winning games and contending, so both regular and post-season success are factors.
There are a zillion considerations that could fill an entire article of their own when putting together any list like this, but I'll try to standardize how I look at the players without complicating things too much. My scenario for considering the value of these players in helping a team contend is:
I can add two good players to a squad whose remainder is 10 average players that cover all the positions, and our goal is to play together for 10 years in a modern-style league and to contend for and win as many titles as possible. The two good players will use their best 8-year stretch throughout the hypothetical decade (considerations allowed for freak injuries, forced to be a backup for too long, baseball sabbaticals, etc – and we're talking abilities & intangibles here, not their stats), with two random seasons from their career that don't fall in the 8-year stretch thrown in at two random spots. So you get the best 8-year stretch of two players, plus two other random seasons from their careers (this helps guys like Parish, hurts guys like Reed), and you want to do as well as you can next to otherwise average teammates for a decade.
That's the basic scenario, and these top-50 are generally grouped by what their role would be as one of those two good players. This isn't a perfect scenario, but it's at least an attempt to consider them all under the same pretenses. Some of the guy's careers are very difficult to place into it, but I attempted to consider a fairly consistent version of it for everyone.
This first group, players 35 through 50, are here because they would certainly have to be the complementary player in the good pair for the entire decade because their peak wasn't high enough or long enough to contend for titles, or they just weren't alpha enough to be “the guy,” or they could be the top guy in the pair for a couple years before problems arose. This last group of players was particularly troublesome to evaluate and place. Rick Barry was super talented and could lead a team to a title, but there is no way he could remain with the same group for an extended period of time before either he or everyone else quit. Oscar Robertson didn't connect with his teammates, and his clubs all ultimately underperformed before he took a supporting role next to Kareem. Dominique didn't exactly understand the team concept, but he had a 3-year stretch that was just brilliant as a club carrier. You get the idea.
The rest of the top 50 list is:
50. Dominique Wilkins – Being a “me first” scorer doesn't endear him to this list, but his '85-86 to '87-88 run is enough to squeak him in; he carried a rather dismal Hawks team to 50, 57, and 50 wins and into the second round in three consecutive seasons during the NBA's most talented stretch while in the East with superb Boston and Detroit clubs, the underrated Bucks, and a rapidly improving Chicago team.
49. Ray Allen – Elite shooter, carried ho-hum Bucks ('01) and Sonics ('05) teams in the playoffs while his teammates got cold, and then became one of three selfless leaders for a great Celtics squad. He's not a standout passer or defender, but he does both intelligently.
48. Joe Dumars – Super complementary player who got it done defensively and in the big moments.
47. Gary Payton – The Glove had every PG skill and obliterated Stockton on numerous occasions, but he could also kill his own team behind-the-scenes.
46. Paul Pierce – Pierce was/is sort of like LeBron Lite with a much better shot and more inconsistent volatility in the playoffs.
45. James Worthy – You could never build a team around Worthy, but for 8 straight years you would absolutely kill for his playoff contributions.
44. Robert Parish – Chief is tough to place since his career was good for so long, but he was never a leader and didn't really peak.
43. Clyde Drexler – All sorts of leadership and skills, except for the “it's a crucial moment (and/or the playoffs) and time to take over” switch.
Only Michael Jordan tops Tommy Heinsohn when it comes to regularly being the top scorer on a Championship club.
42. Tommy Heinsohn – Only 8 players since the advent of the shot clock have lead at least 3 championship teams in scoring during the regular or post-season. Jordan tops the list at 6 times, and Heinsohn is second at 5, besting such luminaries as Kareem (4x), Duncan (4x), Bird (3x), and Shaq (3x). Heinsohn is also the only rookie ever to do it.
41. Rick Barry – His value to a club would be great for a season or two, and by that point he had made a mortal enemy out of every teammate and was looking for a new home. If he and Oscar could have ever learned how to buy into the long-term concept of a team, they would both be in the top-10. Maybe neither of them deserves to be ranked as valuable to a franchise at all..?
40. Oscar Robertson – The Big O had great skills and efficiencies, but he never connected with his teammates nor had big post-season moments, and consequently his Cincinnati teams (which had very good talent) missed multiple playoffs and won only 2 series in 10 years.
39. Nate Thurmond – Thurmond was an absolute gem if his team didn't need him to create much offense, but boy could he defend and get massive amounts of rebounds against anyone.
38. Dennis Rodman – Was a one-man rebounding army who was a better version of LeBron's 2012 defensive self – just don't expect him to score any points.
37. Elgin Baylor – For all the love older fans have for Baylor's pre-Jordan air show and monstrous numbers, he was a really inefficient scorer who just didn't provide the push/attitude to make LA great.
36. Hal Greer – Did pretty much everything well, but he lacked dominance and a strong post-season resume.
35. Patrick Ewing – Maybe the top “stats look good, but playoff/clutch contributions and title-level alpha-dog leader status don't hold up” player since Elvin Hayes.
Reader Comments (8)
Fascinating topic. I think two guys here are a bit underrated:
•Dr. J. Don't be misled by his lack of dominance in Philly. His whole game was airborne, and he'd already lost some altitude on arrival in the NBA, though that's easy to overlook given how much of it he still had left. Also, I distinctly remember his first couple years with the Sixers weren't hyper-efficient not because he couldn't adjust to the league, but because he played the same position as the very inefficient All-Star holdover George McGinnis, and Doc's productivity miraculously improved the moment the unselfish Bobby Jones was put in McGinnis's place.
•Ewing. No, he had a clumsy and underdeveloped offensive game, but he's also a classic example of how one great (Jordan) can block the way from fair recognition of another. When Jordan's first retirement left a brief window for someone else to be recognized, it opened only one slot in the pantheon of fans' memories, and Hakeem filled it.
@tonycd
Thanks for the thoughtful comment. Erving was certainly a tough one to place since his airborne game was so effective in the ABA because everyone knew to not give him a hard foul. I agree McGinnis was a cancer for everyone there...I probably do have him too low considering how good he made Philly even before Moses showed up. I'll bump him up later today when I have a little bit of time to give this full consideration.
Please keep commented on this site.
So I took a lot closer look after reading tonycd's comments at how well the Sixers performed under Erving's leadership before Moses showed up, and I ended up bumping him up into the next group. Thanks for the great comment that really made me think and examine the history more thoroughly.
Where is KOBE?
@Rem
He's with the players whose teams are better when he doesn't play.
http://www.behindthebasket.com/btb/2011/9/1/its-all-about-the-ws-kobe-bryant.html
Good list for the most part but your clear bias against Kobe Bryant is obvious and foolish. To have guys like Bird Magic and Jordan above Kobe is one thing, but Hal Greer, Paul Pierce and Clyde Drexler?? Haha AND to not even place Kobe in your top 50 at all? You look ridiculous. Which team are you a fan of that Kobe has destroyed?
I gotta agree with Erikk...
I give you great kudos for your presentation, length/depth, and overall entertainment value...but blatant biased opinions on certain players taints the article. i see that you do have an article why kobe does not make it but even that article is skewed and slanted. you have an obvious agenda, sir. for some reason...and this is strange, but all this reminds me of a german kid i knew who honestly believed the holocaust never took place and that it was a myth. just baffled...
@Erikk & @louge
If everyone else on the list is either efficient in their production and/or has shown a clear improvement to their squad in the W-L department, why would I then rank Kobe over them when he has both inefficient production and a team that consistently improves in the area of winning when he's out? Because I'm supposed to?
http://www.behindthebasket.com/btb/2011/9/1/its-all-about-the-ws-kobe-bryant.html