Top 100 Greatest NBA Players

I have no problem with Steph Curry being up here, but above Patrick Ewing, Scottie Pippen and Wade this early in his career? Come on now ESPN...

@meepmoop, what about him? Surely you aren't trying to say he should be on this list because he had one good season where he won the MVP?

Well I got Nate Thurmond but missed Jerry West...

Far too many active players too high on this list. Lebron James is an all-time great, partly because he has proven it for several years already. Others like Harden, Bosh, Love, among others are great players, but who have either not proven it for long enough, or are just not as great as this list wants them to be. I know ESPN experts, but think about that for just a moment before you comment--ESPN...they look at current numbers far too much versus old stats. Guys didn't have to put up huge offensive numbers in the old days to be a great player--and teams were far more important, so team play made players great without inflating their stats.

Manu is a key member of four championship teams

@st49ers I would love to see the data that informed your claim that individual stats are inflated and that basketball was more of a team sport in the past. Wilt Chamberlain AVERAGED 50 ppg in a season, and yet he struggled for most of his career to win his first championship. Meanwhile, look at the Spurs today. It seems to me that there have always been some teams led by individual stars, and others led by a strong team offense (and defense). I think the main argument in question is whether players should be ranked by overall quality of career, or by highest peak. If players are ranked by highest peak, young players like Stephen Curry and Kevin Durant would already be higher than many of the old legendary players, and thus age wouldn't matter.

EVERY SINGLE ONE EXCEPT FOR SIDNEY MONCRIEF DAMMIT

I'm still impressed!

I feel you bro, seeing Curry at #23, Westbrook and Harden on the list over Danny Ainge who didn't make it...

Scalabrine?

There's a lot of rankings that are off on this list. It's almost as if ESPN focuses too much on the recent years. Shaq above Kobe? Yes, Kobe's had some injury prone, poor years recently. But so did Shaq. And last time I checked, Kobe has more rings and is higher on the all time scoring list. Karl Malone is also way too low. Yeah he didn't win any rings, but he's second on the all time scoring list. I've also always thought Walton was overrated. He had one good year in the NBA where the Blazers won the ring. The rest of the time he was injured. Finally, and most controversially, Lebron is a great player and deserves to be on this list. However, placing him 3rd, above so many greats, is a bit much, especially when several of those other greats have more championships in tougher eras.

Karl Malone, like many other great players of the 90's, probably would have had some championship rings if he hadn't had the misfortune to play at the same time as Michael Jordan.

To me the most surprising thing about this list isn't the placement of players or omissions...but the fact that Vince Carter is still ACTIVE!!

I had the same reaction. Feels like he's been around since the 70s. :-)

kobe Bryant should for sure be ahead of LeBron for the 3rd all time spot. I'm not hating on LeBron Because I like LeBron but kobe has had a better career by far

if kobe isn't 3rd then at least top 10

No Jack Sikma. He played forever, has a ring, scored 17,000 points despite being on two mostly mediocre teams, led centers in FT% and was the first big man to master the 3-point shot. Not a top 50, but I think he makes top 100. Clearly a lot of subjectivity with this list, not a lot of science or math involved.

Who?

Small update needed when you get a chance. Duncan just retired.

Here's a greatest ever quiz without any opinion, based solely on career win-shares: http://www.jetpunk.com/user-quizzes/103225/top-50-nba-players

this quiz is an outrage how is LeBron so damn high he is a bum he is basically the smartest kid on the shortbus. nobody in this era should be on the list period nothing but overrated bums

I disagree lebron should be on here but curry shouldnt because he only just became good

Curry doesnt deserve to be on this list aleast toward the top maybe around 60 And add Kyrie Irving

Love above Kemp, Ben Wallace, Steve Kerr, Horace Grant, etc?

Steve Kerr was a bench player!

I'm sorry but Allen Iverson should be way higher. I know it's not your decision Quizmaster but just my opinion

When you get Lanier, Cunningham, and Arizin, but forget Harden

So I get Dave DeBusschere and Earl Mornroe, and miss Dr. J, the Admiral, and Pistol Pete.

KOBE

81/100 first try

I realize that this is not the quizmaster's list, but Aldridge should be on here over Blake Griffin (the most overrated basketball player in the world)

Your wrong there Lebron James he's so overrated if he's top 3 why isn't Black Mamba.

When you get Billy Cunningham but miss Dr. J

Garnett, Kobe and Duncan have retired, making them no longer 'active' players....

Kevin love and gasol shouldn't be in here. They haven't proved themselves as hall of fame players

The most avid NBA fans among you should take my NBA Stats Leaders by Year quiz.

easy 100%

I love Manu Ginobili as much as the next guy, but he does not deserve to be on this list.

I disagree.

I'm sorry, is this a 100 Greatest Players in Argentina list?

Needs to be updated, Paul Pierce is retiring this year.

Got #100 first, made me laugh; totally didn't expect him, but I always type Kemp first

ESPN Probably hired kids to make this list HOW Do you put Pau Gasol lightyears in front of James Harden SEE Makes no sense

Steve Nash?

I remember Artis Gilmore. And I blank on Steph Curry. Argh.

Haven't followed basketball since the Bulls dynasty fell apart after 1998, so I didn't do well on this. I know a few random players from the last 20 years, but not nearly enough. As for why ESPN placed so many active guys on the list, keep in mind that it's their nature to be biased in favor of the modern era. After all, "today's players aren't as good as the ones from yesteryear" isn't exactly a good business model. Everyone's got biases, and it makes sense for ESPN to be biased in favor of the modern day since actively promoting the people playing now is good business for them. That doesn't make the list good or bad inherently, I'm just saying to consider the source.

Considering I know hardly any NBA history, 67-100, I'll take that.