Greatest King/Royal of All Time
- Thread starter Oscar
- Start date
The Big O is one of top 5 or certainly top 10 all time greatest players in NBA history. It's absolutely no competition unless Kings fans just decide to vote for a personal favorite on the list. Surely, Reggie Theus should have been on there instead of the immortal Scott Wedman. A more interesting list would have been vote an all time Kings/Royals team. How about: PG: Tiny Archibald/Reggie Theus SG: Oscar Roberston/Mitch Richmond SF: Jack Twyman/Maurice Stokes PF: Chris Webber/Jerry Lucas C: Vlade Divac/Arnie Risen
I think I might have had Jack Twyman and Sam Lacey on the list. Lest anyone forget, or didn't know, Oscar in his rookie year put up 30 pts, 10 rebounds, and 9.7 assists. He missed a 30/10/10 by 3 percentage points. Of course he later went on to do it. Twyman was a prolific scorer who averaged over 19 pts a game for his career. and Lacey was rebounder and shotblocker that could give you 12 to 14 pts a game. There certainly would have been another guy on the list if the Royals hadn't traded him to soon. They drafted Bob Love and traded him after his third year, if memory serves. After he went to Chicago he blossomed into a great player. But then, the great GM that destroyed the Cinn. Royals, and who would later return to the franchise and re-do the favor, Joe Axelson, traded away Lucas and Robertson.
I feel bad for Mitch Richmond. You guys obviously don't remember how GREAT this guy was. He was the ONLY THING worth talking about in Sacramento for over a decade. Mitch Richmond was the only name you'd hear about when it came to our organization. Sure Chris Webber was awesome... but would he have been if he didn't have the supporting cast he had? He had an awesome PG in both Jason Williams and Mike Bibby. He had an amazing passing Center in Vlade Divac and Scott Pollard. It was cake for him to play well on our team when we had him. Mitch Richmond on the other hand? This dude played with nothing but SCRUBS for the entire time he was on our team! It's safe to say that the next best player he played with back in the day was probably Lionel Simmons or Walt Williams or maybe Spud Webb... But keep it 100% REAL... THOSE GUYS WERE ALL SCRUBS compared to the surrounding cast Chris Webber had...
So with that said... MITCH RICHMOND! I see you bud... and I still have your autographed basketball in my bedroom with the rest of the entire team from 1993.
So with that said... MITCH RICHMOND! I see you bud... and I still have your autographed basketball in my bedroom with the rest of the entire team from 1993.
I sincerely doubt that anyone forgot Mitch Richmond! You can only vote for one player, and unfortunately, for me, Mitch, god love him, isn't Oscar Robertson. Who I voted for. Had I not voted for Robertson, Webber would have been my second choice. Tiny Archibald my third choice, and I understand that a lot of folks never saw Tiny play, but I did. After that, Mitch would have been the next selection. And by the way, Simmons was no scrub. If it wern't for his knee injuries, he might have been Paul Pierce before Paul Pierce. Maybe not, but he was no scrub.
Simmons was above average. At best could have been a marginal All Star. He was no where near athletic enough to be considered Paul Pierce. The closest player in the NBA since would have been Bobby Simmons, which is not really a compliment.
Also, I think the obvious answer is Oscar. Even so, I still voted C-Webb. I don't really consider anyone who played pre-Sacramento to be a King (I know the poll included Royals players). Mitch is a close second, and is unfortunately very underrated.
Also, I think the obvious answer is Oscar. Even so, I still voted C-Webb. I don't really consider anyone who played pre-Sacramento to be a King (I know the poll included Royals players). Mitch is a close second, and is unfortunately very underrated.
I keep hearing that Mitch is underrated. By whom? Not by me, nor his peers around the league. He certainly got a lot of props from Michael Jordan from time to time. He made the all star team. He is one of those few, that played extremely well at both ends of the floor. Now there may be somebody 19 years old that lives in Detroit that might underrate Mitch, but thats to be expected. I think Mitch was recognized around the league as a very good player that bordered on greatness.
There is a difference between being underrated and not being remembered. Which is why some are voting for Webber over Robertson.
There is a difference between being underrated and not being remembered. Which is why some are voting for Webber over Robertson.
Speaking of forgotten, apparently Simmons has been. So just to remind some of you not familar with the L Train. He led all of college in scoring his senior year at LaSalle. When he finished college he was third on the list of all time leading scorers in total points. His first four years in the league with the Kings, he averaged 17 PPG, 7.9 RPG, 4.2 APG, 1.0 BPG, and 1.4 SPG. When you consider that he actually played PF for LaSalle, and had to adjust to playing SF in the NBA, he was a pretty damm good player.
Unfortunately in his fifth year, the injury bug bit him big time and he only played two or three more years, a mere shadow of himself. The shame of it is, I felt he was just starting to find himself comfortable at the SF position when everything went south. He was a very good all around player, and we'll never know just how good he might have been if he hadn't been plagued by injuries.
Unfortunately in his fifth year, the injury bug bit him big time and he only played two or three more years, a mere shadow of himself. The shame of it is, I felt he was just starting to find himself comfortable at the SF position when everything went south. He was a very good all around player, and we'll never know just how good he might have been if he hadn't been plagued by injuries.
Maybe this would have worked better as favorite player because otherwise you have to vote for Oscar. Sorry C-Webb.
Gotta agree with Baja on both Rock and Simmons. I think Rock was extremely highly regarded, sometimes as the second best 2 in the league during his day. No way underrated. Simmons was a real shame. I really only got to see about 2 years of him since that was when I took off to BU and League Pass was some kind of crazy dream.
Gotta agree with Baja on both Rock and Simmons. I think Rock was extremely highly regarded, sometimes as the second best 2 in the league during his day. No way underrated. Simmons was a real shame. I really only got to see about 2 years of him since that was when I took off to BU and League Pass was some kind of crazy dream.
I agree Rock was not underrated by his peers or older posters on this forum. I was speaking more to the younger guys posting here. Sorry I did not make that clear.
As for the L-Train. He was definitely a very good player. I just thought the comparison to Paul Pierce was wholly incorrect and that he would have probably not been an All- Star had he not been injured.
As for the L-Train. He was definitely a very good player. I just thought the comparison to Paul Pierce was wholly incorrect and that he would have probably not been an All- Star had he not been injured.
Well as far as Simmons goes, we'll never know, will we? But when you comprare Simmons first four years to Pierce's first four years, their not very far apart. The biggest differential is Simmons 17.0 PPG to Pierce's 21 PPG. other than that, Simmons was ahead of Pierce in just about every catagory. Considering that Pierce was playing his natural position, and Simmons was learning how to play more on the perimiter, its hard to say what the future held for Simmons. Simmons knee problems actually started in his fourth year, so his scoring was down a little from his previous three years, at 15 PPG.
Personally I think he would have been an all star at some point in his career. I also think it would have helped his cause if he had been playing in Boston intead of Sacramento. He was a terrific rebounder for a SF, and also a outstanding passer, averaging over 4 assists a game his first four years in the league.
One area Pierce had a distinct advantage was in 3 pt shooting. Simmons seldom attempted a 3 pt shot shooting only around a 150 3 pointers in his six year career. I always found that odd since he was a pretty good 3 pt shooter in college.
Anyway, this isn't about my trying to say that he was as good or better than Paul Pierce. It is what it is, and Pierce is a great player. What I was trying to say is that Simmons was a very good player that had his career changed by injuries at age 26, and ended at age 28. The prime years of most NBA players. Without injuries, at worse he would have been a career 18 PPG, 8 RPG, and 4 APG player. Take a look around the league and see how many SF's you see putting up those numbers. Hmmm! We could use him right now..
Personally I think he would have been an all star at some point in his career. I also think it would have helped his cause if he had been playing in Boston intead of Sacramento. He was a terrific rebounder for a SF, and also a outstanding passer, averaging over 4 assists a game his first four years in the league.
One area Pierce had a distinct advantage was in 3 pt shooting. Simmons seldom attempted a 3 pt shot shooting only around a 150 3 pointers in his six year career. I always found that odd since he was a pretty good 3 pt shooter in college.
Anyway, this isn't about my trying to say that he was as good or better than Paul Pierce. It is what it is, and Pierce is a great player. What I was trying to say is that Simmons was a very good player that had his career changed by injuries at age 26, and ended at age 28. The prime years of most NBA players. Without injuries, at worse he would have been a career 18 PPG, 8 RPG, and 4 APG player. Take a look around the league and see how many SF's you see putting up those numbers. Hmmm! We could use him right now..
