Why is no one else mentioning Michael Redd? I know he's not one of your flashiest players, but he's a class act guy (unlike other mentions of AI) and even though he's always been with the Bucks who have NEVER been good, he's never asked for a trade. He's loyal to his ball club. He's averaged 20PPG for his career. Back in 06'-07' he averaged 26.7PPG. I understand he was on a bad team, but think about this: On a team where you're the only offensive bright spot, you should be the one guy the defense focuses on... yet you manage to shoot a CAREER 44.9FG% and 38.3% 3PT and 84% from the foul line. Can you imagine this guys numbers on a team with a true pass-first playmaking PG and having one or two teammates who constantly drew double teams?
LOL, you mean the guy who left Toronto, then Toronto wins a playoff series, the guy who left Orlando, then they got Dwight Howard and made it to the NBA finals, the guy who sat in Houston and watched as Yao and Ron Artest made it without him? that guy?
Good rebounder. Only defense he played were random cheapshots and bearhugs. Then again, all Nate McMillan teams play dirty.
Don't you get a trophy for reaching the finals? From the WCF or ECF? I thought they do. If so, then I would count that as something. At least it's a hardware. If not, then disregard this post and accept my apology.
I agree with Jontro. You guys are defining success as the highest peak when I think players like Nash and Vince are highly successful players, especially with respect to the fools coming off the bench. Success is relative. Success for the bench players can be having that surprising impact in an important game.
