All-Time Basketball IQ Rankings [TOP 20]

Richie thanks for the post. I was surprise by the Dennis Rodman being on the list and Chuck Daly comment. IQ probably has a sliding definition for all of us.

 

I have seen quite a bit of Bill Russell's games and have followed basketball for 30 seasons. You can discuss efficiency as much as you want, but he shot 43% in his career in the playoffs and the regular season and 60% from the line.

Bill Russell was a great player, and a very smart player. However, to believe that the quality of teammates and coaching did not play a large part in his success is a flawed in my opinion.

 

The argument for Russell is he was just that far ahead of everyone else defensively at the time. There was no one even close to his level defensively. Not even a tier below. The difference between the Celtics defenses when anchored by Russell and everyone else was just ridiculous.

 

I'm not offended by it, it was just a bad joke.

In fact I take it back, I am offended. I'm offended at how unfunny that joke really was.

 

That is true. People point to Russell's offensive inefficiencies in his shooting BUT fail to realize that Wilt was substantially WORSE from the FT line and Wilt was the primary offensive option while Russell was the 4th or 5th option on his team. Wilt was substantially WORSE turning the ball over too. That went unmeasured in their era. But Bill knew that if Wilt caught the ball in the paint area that he was going to try to score it. He knew Wilt's ego and persona. The Celtics designed the play to feed Wilt in the post and then attack him backside. Wilt was a turnover machine. And those turnovers never show up in the box as fruitless possessions. When you add those in along with his piss-poor free throw shooting, Bill knew how to beat Wilt's teams. Russell's basketball iq dwarfed Wilt's and the other players of his generation. The Celtics as an organization dwarfed the league in basketball iq starting with Red, Bill, Cousy, Hondo..and then later Bird.

 

Intelligence in the NBA should really only be measured by the success the individual had on the court by winning and the role that person played to accomplish that. That being said, the answer should be calculated by assessing who was the most dominant force in the most competitive era with the most championships.

Answer: Michael Jordan

 

The day Lebron James retires, Larry Bird will be forgotten.

Sad, but true.

 

Where's Jeremy Lin?

 

I think Bill Walton is a contender as well. For me it's between him, Russell, Magic and Bird.

 

To whomever brought up Kobe, here's my contentions why Kobe doesn't belong on the list:

1. He has consistently failed to elevate his teammates play. Nobody plays better around Kobe. He restricts and suffocates his teammates while demanding their best efforts, while he jacks too many shots. He has Jordan's mentality without Jordan's elite skill level. Notice I said he doesn't have Jordan's skill level. He has great skill level. But not on Jordan's level. He turned Steve Nash, one of the greatest playmakers of all time, and a much more efficient offensive player than him, into a spot-up shooter last year. And he turned what should have been an awesome pick-and-roll combination with Dwight into the pick-and-rebound for Dwight.

2. Taking #1 a step further, he has alienated teammates on the floor, Shaq and Dwight being the first two that come to mind. But not the only two. I watched him mangle Pau on-court several years ago. They wound up losing.

3. He consistently goes to the low efficiency play, him jacking the jumper, and failing to work the ball into a more efficient team shot.

Now, that's all on-court stuff there. As far as off-court goes we know what happened with him and Shaq. Kobe put the Lakers in a spot where they had to move one or the other. In the process he cost himself and the Laker organization at least 2 and possibly 3 more rings. If he hadn't done that but had instead gotten together with Shaq and worked it out where they could stay together, he would have eclipsed Jordan in most people's minds and would have quite the argument for greatest player ever and Lebron would be looking WAY UP HILL to get to him. But you know what happened...he forced Shaq out.

And just this last season....Kobe holds that organization in his hand. He does nothing, exercises no privilege, while the organization goes away from PJax and to MDA. (Did I mention that Kobe is primarily responsible for PJax walking away from the Lakers twice?) Did nothing the entire season to help make that team work, to accomodate Dwight, to make Nash effective. He was unwilling to play off the ball.

I could go on and on. But when you look at guys like Russell and Bird and Magic. First of all Russell has rings. You can't dispute that. Bird got 3 rings. He could've had more but his back cost him a couple rings. Magic got 5 rings. He could've possibly gotten more but his career was cut short with AIDS. You can't point to anything Bird and Magic did on-court to cost themselves and their teams rings. Now...Magic with the promiscuous lifestyle...yes, very dumb. But that's not basketball iq. When you look at Kobe...I can point to his play on-court and his lack of elevating teammates and his disparaging treatment of teammates that cost him multiple rings.

Kobe is a great player. There's no doubt about it. But to put him on the list of greatest basketball iq players of all-time?? When he has cost himself and his team somewhere between 2 and 5 rings???? No way Jose.

 

i voted for nash

but

whatabout walt frazier?

 

The old guys, including me will vote Bird all day long. He was a basketball assassin. I can't think of a modern counter part. He didn't have the elite athleticism, or even the elite skills, but he was a master of the game.

 

Bird and its not even close.

 

I'd say those who have a successful coaching career like bird or Russell. Deserve to be higher. They transcended their physical gifts and still won.

Don't remember West's coaching career...

 

Rasheed Wallace should at least be on the honorable mention list. Very underrated IQ.

 

Court vision, no (compared to great point forwards), but I disagree re basketball IQ. Being at the right spot, making the right play. To me, he's the most fun 70s / early 80s player to watch, and not because of athletic plays, but just playing the right way.