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
Sure, I enjoyed putting it together. The first time I read Chuck Daly's quote on Rodman's intelligence I was mildly surprised. But then I thought about it. Rodman dedicated himself to being the ultimate team player. Anything his Bad Boys needed... a key defensive stop, a timely rebound, a loose ball... Dennis was always there, getting dirty for Coach Daly. The father-son bond was there from the beginning. An excerpt from Slam magazine: That being said, I believe Chuck Daly truly meant what he said about Rodman being the most intelligent player he's ever coached. He wasn't the type to show favoritism -- or should I say, nepotism.
I can respect your logic. My question is whether the 90s were truly the NBA's most competitive era? I believe there is a reason MJ didn't advance to the Finals until his 6th season in the league. (Well after the Forum, the Palace and Boston Garden dominated the postseason on CBS.) The 80s were, for my money, the golden age of pro basketball. Team rosters were much more balanced with offensive talent, defenses were much less forgiving--especially during the playoffs. Clear path to the basket? Flagrant 2s? Automatic suspensions for leaving the bench? What are those commish? That's why I'm going with Bird and Magic. If by 'forgotten' you mean saddled behind LeBron in the pecking order of all time greatest SF, then I too sadly agree. Today's 24/7 sports media machine is nothing, if not persuasive. But if we're talking basketball IQ, then most purists will stick with Larry Legend. Pencil me in among them.
Sorry, a tad late to the party, buddy. (see page 2) Giving testimonies in China somewhere, I think. It's been posted in the GARM.
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.
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.
This. You nailed it right on the head. Saved me the trouble of having to explain why Kobe doesn't even deserve a spot on my Honorable Mentions (which he isn't) -- let alone my Top 20. An inefficient, sociopathic volume shooter does not a high BB IQ make. Kobe is, and will always be, his own worst enemy. When I saw him wave off Karl Malone on a pick during his 1st NBA All-Star Game, I knew he wasn't very bright. You just don't do that as a rookie. Not to an accomplished future HOF like Malone. When he whined to his teammates in the locker room about why they (Shaq, Rick Fox, Brian Shaw et. al.) didn't publicly come to his defense during the Eagle, CO rape hearings... Brian Shaw simply said (paraphrasing), "Kobe we don't even know you, man. Shaq has invited to lots of parties. We've invited to dinners while on the road. You've never shown up. You don't even play cards with us on the plane. You've never taken the time to be one of us." That sums up his on-court persona. He's a megalomaniac who only cares about winning when he's #1 in Usage % and Offensive Win Shares. His obsession with Michael Jordan began long, long ago. Sadly, he never developed MJs basketball acumen or team-oriented philosophy (albeit later in his career). Anyone who disagrees just didn't watch Jordan's teams during their championship crusades. That being said, Kobe's talent and drive cannot be questioned.
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...
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.