SI's Best Players By Number

[SVT Cobra]

Pretty much spot on.

 

[ballmode]

yup, except marvin harrison should have been 88, and bird > kareem

 

[Lorax]

meh, debating greatness across sports, not my idea of a good time. people have enough trouble figuring out who the best within each sport is.

 

[DBL]

Originally posted by: Lorax
meh, debating greatness across sports, not my idea of a good time. people have enough trouble figuring out who the best within each sport is.

hah, a horse before Jeter. Nice!

 

[JeffreyLebowski]

I like the entry for #23. "any objections?"

 

[thesurge]

Originally posted by: ballmode
yup, except marvin harrison should have been 88, and bird > kareem

LOL no.

 

[bobert]

I'm glad they atleast got #10 right

edit: even as a football fan, there seems to be too much from that sport. not very balanced

 

[krunchykrome]

Too bad they didnt make the list to #52.


Begins with a Ray and ends with a Lewis.

 

[DnetMHZ]

Originally posted by: krunchykrome
Too bad they didnt make the list to #52.


Begins with a Ray and ends with a Lewis.

There are links to the rest of the list up to 99

 

[krunchykrome]

Originally posted by: DnetMHZ
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: krunchykrome
Too bad they didnt make the list to #52.


Begins with a Ray and ends with a Lewis.</end quote></div>

There are links to the rest of the list up to 99

Yup, he's the #52 guy.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: JeffreyLebowski
I like the entry for #23. "any objections?"

:laugh: I jut got to that one and came back here to post the same thing.

I think #99 is worthy of equal treatment.

One of my favorite Gretzky stats:

By the age of ten he scored 378 goals and 139 assists in just 85 games with the Nadrofsky Steelers

:Q

 

[andylawcc]

didn't Rodman had big numbers like 55, 73, and 91?

 

[Pacemaker]

Originally posted by: bobert
I'm glad they atleast got #10 right

edit: even as a football fan, there seems to be too much from that sport. not very balanced

53 team members vs 12 for basketball (I think anyway it's been a long time since I followed it) and a similar number for hockey. Not sure how many baceball players per team but I don't think it's 53.

Plus the fact that football has strict numbering guidlines (QB's have to be 1-19 and halfbacks have to be 20 - 40 so on and so forth) causes there to be a larger spread of numbers used.

What it comes down to is any number based cross sport list like this is going to be football biased purely from the way the different sports choose numbers.

 

[SVT Cobra]

Originally posted by: thesurge
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: ballmode
yup, except marvin harrison should have been 88, and bird > kareem</end quote></div>

LOL no.

:thumbsup:

 

[paulxcook]

They picked Elway over Mickey Mantle? Wow.
Roberto Clemente over Ladanian Tomlinson AND Roger Clemens?
Ugh, Marvin Harrison never gets appropriate recognition for being possibly the 2nd best WR ever.

 

[Inspector Jihad]

stupid and pointless list

 

[Slick5150]

Originally posted by: paulxcook
They picked Elway over Mickey Mantle? Wow.
Roberto Clemente over Ladanian Tomlinson AND Roger Clemens?
Ugh, Marvin Harrison never gets appropriate recognition for being possibly the 2nd best WR ever.

2nd best WR ever? Good lord, I don't even think he's the 2nd best WR in the game right now.
He's very good, but he's not all time great.

 

[Slick5150]

Its funny how some numbers are just loaded with talent, and some have slim pickings to choose from. #26 for example. Rod Woodson?? His only competition was Wade Boggs, Herb Adderly, and Billy Williams (and I doubt most people even know who those last two are)

 

[andylawcc]

i wonder how they get into concensus. i mean, the basketball guy must be furious with the baseball guy.