Author Topic: Barkley, Stockton, Malone, Ewing, 0 rings & in a class by themselves  (Read 4751 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Barkley, Stockton, Malone, Ewing, 0 rings & in a class by themselves
« Reply #15 on: July 05, 2009, 07:43:02 PM »

Offline TitleMaster

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 980
  • Tommy Points: 117
Chief's also in the Hall of Fame.

Re: Barkley, Stockton, Malone, Ewing, 0 rings & in a class by themselves
« Reply #16 on: July 05, 2009, 07:43:38 PM »

Offline Fafnir

  • Bill Russell
  • ******************************
  • Posts: 30863
  • Tommy Points: 1330
Ewing's not a for sure Hall of fame player.  A good player but not in the class of the other 3 unless you listen to the center of the universe NYC press.  I would take the Chief long before Patrick Ewing.


Not sure if I'm misunderstanding, but you realize Ewing IS a Hall of Famer, and Chief is not, right?
Robert Parish is in the Hall of Fame.

Re: Barkley, Stockton, Malone, Ewing, 0 rings & in a class by themselves
« Reply #17 on: July 05, 2009, 09:02:53 PM »

Offline feckless

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1214
  • Tommy Points: 93
Your right I did not know the Ewing was in the Hall --IMO that is undeserved--DJ??

The Knicks and Knicks' players are given a great deal of attention due to the NY press--(and i live in upstate NY)--think about how crappy they have been and yet how much ink they get -- if Nate Robinson played for Utah would you ever hear his name?  would he have been in the slam dunk much less won.  Ewing was good but not a Barkley, Stockton or Malone--just the best the Knicks and all the press who write about the knick's had at the time.
Days up and down they come, like rain on a conga drum, forget most, remember some, don't turn none away.   Townes Van Zandt