Kareem Abdul-Jabbar Is Lowkey Overrated...

#basketball #nba #commentary

[hdanliam]

A take is a take, but I think theres a lot wrong with the logic on this one. Saying he won MVPs because he was ny far the best player in the league so no one else could win them and holding that against him seems so backward to me. He's the best player in the league, so he wins MVP, that's a positive.

Holding his longevity against him is also flawed. He was the unquestioned best player in the league for a decade, there are only 2 players who you can give this accolade to in MJ and LeBron. Then analysing his final years of a 20 year career to knock him, when only LeBron can hold a candle to the perfomance levels that late in your career is also a poor argument. He was good enough to play, and play at an elite level, for that long - its a positive.

Bringing up his per 100 scoring stats, which are elite, and then comparing stats to pure scorers, without acknowledging the defence in conjunction with those stats doesn't give you a full picture.

Ultimately its so hard to compare eras, from style to average level of the NBA at a given moment. But greatness is greatness, Kareem would trancend any era. He's my number three by quite the margin.

[bnsz]

I don’t like the “he had no competition” argument. Cause it has nothing to do with the player themselves and is basically punishing people for being too much better then their competition.

[bigsoulja]

Rusty confirmed the kid's dad from Airplane

[jeffhunter]

I understand dismissing the 70’s entirely supports your case, but not even mentioning the multiple championships won by the Knicks and the Celtics, or the record breaking season of the Lakers is not fair at all. You can declare he had no real competition for championships, and that on his greatness alone he should have won multiple titles easily, but that contradicts the realities of that era, and it contradicts the reality of this era too, to some degree. So come on now.

[matthieusaade]

Longevity That sounds like a LeBron thing, but sure let's sh*t on the old players
The more time passes the worst his takes get .

[bigwillie]

Yeah you’re smoking rocks with this one. He literally has the a case for GOAT basketball player in every level

[DrawQuick]

Rusty doing his best to bring todays cancerous twitter arguments back to the past disgusting

[manamongstboyz]

You never mentioned watching ANY film of “Washed Kareem”. Anyone who watched the 85 Finals film knows that Worthy was nowhere near arguably better than Kareem & that the series changed because of Kareem not Magic. You need to watch film instead of creating blind narratives with stats

[j-rey-]

I remember when BSOLZ made this same argument and he got roasted 😂

[heatcheckchuk]

I'm not trying to mess with your head by "hating" because mental health is important but you are objectively wrong with this take. (I'm not sure if you're saying he can't be third or your puzzled why so many have him at 3)

One thing I noticed about you and your friend's rank for players in your podcast, y'all care way too much about ppg on high efficiency. Placing guys with high usage and above average efficiency below guys who are asked to do less, spend less energy on offense and hit less contested shots from 3. It's absurd. (Unless you believe that Mikal Bridges got worse, when he clearly added more aspects to his game)

By any standard in comparison to his peers, Lew Alcindor/KAJ was the best player in the world at UCLA before he graduated. Yes, better than anyone in the league. You've heard the saying, you can't teach height and that's a big reason why he had the Longevity. In his prime, the man is a good amount taller than Shaq, mobile, and explosive. I don't know how you can bust a nut talking about Wemby as much as you do and not realize that Kareem takes advantage of the same things compared to his era.

Speaking about eras, you can't compare them. It's extremely hard especially when you're using a statistics without context. Using the Sacramento Kings as an example Sabonis has more assists than Chris Webber but he's not a better playmaker. DHO are more prevalent and spacing in the paint is at an all time high. However using your logic, I could make the argument that Sabonis is the superior playmaker.

You can be the best player in the world and not win. Your philosophy on why they weren't winning when he was at his prime is such a casual take that I contemplated unsubscribing. You recognize that you are comparing Kareem to '13 Lebron who was coached by Spo with Riley looking over it. Not to mention versatile Bosh and bum knee Wade (still very good). Another example is how Kobe was at his prime in between his 3rd and 4th championship and he could carry them to the second round.

I don't fault you for having a winning bias because even the most impartial sports fans do. We retrospectively say of course he's a winner but only after they win. You can research Dirk, Steph, and Jokic coverage before they won. I bring this up to say I can feel your dislike for James Harden when discussing that even he was much more efficient as if he wasn't one of the best scorers in the league. In his prime, he could score from every on the court and was a Chris Paul hamstring away from a championship going through the team a lot of people claim is the best ever constructed. Put some respect on his name.

I know you listen to thinking basketball. You don't have to agree with all of their points, but you have to make more convincing points or people will confuse you with a hot take machine, fishing for outrage.

[TherealMatthias]

I think this might be your worst take since you argued that John Wall is the best PG in the league like 7 years ago. I’ve been watching for long enough that I’ll try to watch the vid with an open mind

[michaelscalzo]

Kareem won an MVP in a season where he didn’t make the playoffs, genuinely disgusting

[redhorsepapi]

Please keep the same energy for Lebron.

[cyrillesu]

I love that half of your points are stuff that Kareem has no control over and a few more completely lack context. You also fail to realize that some of the points you made against Kareem can also be used against LeBron who you say is by far better than Kareem. Just goes to show that y'all don't actually like basketball and pretty much just use it to pathetically assert your intellectual superiority which in truth is just a sign that you're chronically online.

[YouCallThataKnife]

Love the channel, but I have to disagree with a number of your points:

*_Not enough winning before Magic_*
Kareem is a classic center; he doesn't bring the ball up, and he doesn't initiate offense. His job is to score and play good defense, both of which he did at the highest levels. It is almost universally understood that a great center needs a great lead guard, and before Magic the best Kareem had was an old Oscar Robertson. Despite this, he went to two Finals with Milwaukee, winning the first, and going seven games in the second. To be fair to Oscar, he played well in that first run, but was a much lesser player in the second. Either way, Kareem was excellent, and was arguably better in that second run against the Celtics. Why didn't he also win in LA? I don't know, but Kareem was still doing his job as an elite two-way player.

*_Problematic Efficiency_*
You used true shooting % and then compared him to a bunch of modern wings who shoot threes. I don't think you're trying to be disingenuous, but that's pretty unfair. Kareem shot well over 50% from the field every season of his career besides his final one, and had some seasons at/around 60%. He also shot 72% from the free throw line for his career, which is quite good for big man. It should also be noted that he was doing this at a time with no spacing, and no illegal defense, so guys could just camp in the paint.

*_Did most of his winning after teaming up with Magic_*
Right, and Magic had Kareem. I don't know why you're intent on discussing Kareem as if he was a bum during the 80s, but he averaged over 20 ppg (both in playoffs and regular season) for the majority of that run. And up to about '86, he was no worse than the second best center in the league (I'd give the nod to Moses Malone). Point is, they were great together, and they built on each other's skillsets. Shaq may have won all the Finals MVPs during the Lakers' threepeat, but they don't win any chips without Kobe's play, as well.

I think it's fine if you don't think Kareem belongs in the top 3 (I still think his GOAT argument is strong), but let's be fair about our assessments. To me, Kareem's career just shows how imperfectly things can go if you don't have the right system around you. And this is true no matter how good you are.

[rebelranger]

A couple of counterpoints here. While the NBA in the 1970s was definitely weaker due to competition with the ABA, it wasn't weaker at the center position. The only real elite center the ABA had was Artis Gilmore. Yes Wilt was older, but he was still leading the NBA in rebounds and probably would have won defensive player of the year once or twice in the 70s had the award existed at that time. Also, Kareem had to compete against HOF centers from the 70s such as Willis Reed, Bob Lanier, Nate Thurmond, and Dave Cowens, all of whom were in their peak during the 70s before the ABA merger, and were better than every ABA center except for Gilmore. The ABA was more of a wings and guards league. He also played against peak Gilmore and Bill Walton after the merger.

Also, when comparing Kareem's per 100 numbers like TS%, those numbers are going to be lower for players from the 60s, 70s, and early 80s because the league as a whole was a lot less efficient during that time. So, it's not really a fair comparison to compare his efficiency numbers to Curry, Durant, or even Jordan. What is fair is to compare the difference between his offensive rating and defensive rating, which those same statistics that you highlighted showed Kareem with a 22 point difference (116 Offensive rating vs 94 defensive rating), better than Curry (121 vs 107, a 14 point difference), Durant (119 vs 103 a 16 point difference), and Jordan (121 vs 103, an 18 point difference).

I agree with some of your other points, that he won only 1 championship in the 70s and maybe 3 at tops as the best player for a championship winning team. His rebounding and block shot numbers also took a major hit during the 80s, and he wasn't the same athletic player that he was in the 70s. And there were definitely a lot of ABA players that could have competed with him for MVPs had they played in the NBA (or if the two leagues merged sooner). Overall, I think you have a good case, but I think that this little bit of nuance should still be considered.

[SekeU]

Yayyyy another episode of “Sh!tting on the Greats of yesteryear”… This is getting old…

[willingexile]

This is one take I can't get behind. Rick Barry missed only the first two years of Kareem's career. Kareem also had good competition during the early part of his career - Unseld. Hayes, Cowens, Lanier, Reed, McAdoo, Haywood, Thurmond, young Walton, even old Wilt. Let's trade the 1976 MVP for the one which Kareem lost in 1973 despite the Bucks having a 60-22 record and Kareem doing better than Dave Cowens (the Celtics had 68 wins that year) statistically. Some of the MVP voting in that period was strange, like Bill Walton winning in 1978 despite playing only in 58 games. As for the 1980 MVP he was still the best performer on the team. Putting it all on Magic was a stretch. Furthermore, Kareem carried the Lakers in the 1980 Finals with an average of 33 points though he missed Game 6. Well, we will still credit Magic for what he did but it wasn't like Kareem did nothing.

As for longevity, try running your numbers on the average length of careers NBA players had during that period. Rest and recuperation were not on the list of most NBA players in that era, especially with the rampant drug problem and the lifestyles players led back then. Kareem's discipline enabled him to play impactful basketball far longer than his contemporaries, though maybe in the last three years it was clear Magic was already carrying the team.

We have to admit that for some part of the '70s the existence of two leagues left some guys off their peak competition, but in Kareem's case his first five years he still had good veterans to compete against, and the majority of his career was post-merger. Minimizing his accomplishments by your logic also diminishes whatever Russell, Wilt, West, and Robertson achieved. It becomes reductionist in the sense because of how we are trying to compare accomplishments across eras. Let's also not take away his accomplishments in high school and college. In fact, I would argue Kareem is underrated because he hardly got great press.

[alphabrother]

What I find interesting is that when people state their all time starting 5, they’ll often pick Shaq over Kareem despite claiming him to be greater

[gimmibox]

Respect your opinion but this feels like dipping into analysis paralysis territory.