ease up turbo, he won two ships with the Tigers, made the NCAA championship game (was actually one of the main reasons they got that far) won a ring with the Spurs, carried Australia on his back through several Olympic campains, never played with a dominant Chris Anstey and lets face it the league aint what she used to be! Do you really think people are going to remember Bradley Sheridan for winning 3 rings with the kings? Personal accolades are remembered, as will Gaze's legacy as Australia's best ever baller!!!

What, so mark bradtke wasn't dominant? Lanard Copeland wasn't one of the best imports Australia has seen? D-mac and Gaze? He's simply not a winner.

Won a ship with the Spurs... on the injured list. Great comment, Lloyd Braun.

'Do you really think people are going to remember Bradley Sheridan for winning 3 rings with the kings? Personal accolades are remembered' That's a bit ironic don't you think, Lloyd Braun?

But good try anyway.

Damn he did win in 93, my bad, Maher still has more than him. Oh well, you cant win them all.....clearly Andrew.

Copleland and Bradtke were both legit players through that 1990's period, so perhaps bad coaching is to blame, which still reflects on a Gaze.

perhaps ELG is just a little grumpy and worried that his warriors look a little light on this year for the up coming ABL season??

Gaze won two championships. That's two more than Ewing, Barkley, Malone, Stockton. Those guys are legends of the game, but the cards didn't fall their way.

Plenty of things need to happen at just the right time for a team to win the Ship. It happened twice in the NBL for Gaze, once on the NBA and nearly happened in the NCAA. That's pretty good, and shows in fact he IS a winner.

ELG, would you say Paul Rees is more of a winner than Gaze? I'm biased and I still think that concept is ridiculous.

Gaze is the man.

Gaze was a winner full stop.

If it wasn't for gaze who would the nbl had turned to for promoting the game? Vlahov?

If MJ won only 2 ships instead of 6 would you say MJ is not a winner?

Dumb comment

The point I am making is those guys didn't win an NBA Championship, but are still considered winners, if not legends.

Gaze did win championships (putting his NBA ring aside) in the NBL and set individual records in this league unlikely to be matched maybe ever. His stats are crazy. He is the 2nd all-time scoring leader in Olympic competition.

The guy is one of the best pure shooters going around, in any league. He was chosen to carry the Aussie flag at the 2000 Olympics. Sounds like a winner to me.

Anonymous when you get very little court time and are not needed on a roster due to the talent already there... your not going to be a superstar. how many great guards did the teams gaze on have? now im not a huge gaze fan, but im certain he could tear away NBA offence and be a bigtime scorer..... why is it that he was able to play so well against the dream team everytime? thoes guys are the best of the NBA and he always played well. Having said this Gaze had no defence and i think people centered the team to much around him (boomers, tigers)

I don't share the view on Andrew holding the Tigers back, but I question what Lindsay was doing.

I would think that signing Anstey the best big man by far would have something to do with the tigers going all the way.

Had they signed someone like Simmons or Helliwell I doubt they would have gone all the way.

If Gaze had Anstey instead of Bradtke in his last year Im sure they would have been worlds better.

I think the Tigers dominating has more to do with Anstey arriving rather than Gaze leaving.

Anstey was Finals MVP, will most likely be league MVP, averaged 22/10 for the year, lead the league in blocks and is the only true inside/outside big man Australia has ever seen.

I'm sure if he had played in Melbourne last year Gaze would have 3 rings.

I haven't made any NBA comparisons in terms of how good Gaze was, just making the point that due to certain circumstances not all great players (winners) can win all the time. Jordans 6 rings, Hakeems 2 rings, Isaih's 2 rings then the Spurs/Lakers meant that some true legends of the game missed out on a ring. They are still winners.

I'm sure there are comparable NBL players, just can't think of any.

Sub-topic - best NBL player never to win a ring????

Off the top of my head - Derek Rucker perhaps? There were plenty of highly talented imports who only stayed for 1-2 years (Doug Overton, Bobby Locke etc.) who I don't think really count.

Re : Gaze, I think to say he wasn't a winner is a bit of a stretch. Yes, they "only" won 2 championships in his time, but from the late-80's onwards, they were rarely non-contenders. Around Gaze's prime in the 90's the titles went to : Perth (90, 91 & 95), SE Melbourne (92 & 96), Melbourne (93 & 97), North Melbourne (94), 36ers (98 & 98/99). The majority of those sides were all strong throughout the entire period. It's not all that easy to win a handful of rings in a competition that was so evenly matched.

Screw this 'winner / loser' rubbish. What Gaze was to the Australian basketball scene was an icon, a pioneer that lead the way for other Aussies to attend College, play in the NBA, play in Europe etc etc. He was the face of Australian basketball pretty much until he retired last year.

I couldn't give a damn how many rings he's won, but what he did was become the greatest ambassador to the sport of basketball that Australia has seen and for that single reason alone the comment 'Gaze not a winner' is irrelevant.

Everywhere Paul Rees went he brought championships to... that says something doesn't it? He even did it in the ABL. A sign of a winner.

before thedoctor rapes my post, he didn't win one "everywhere". That was a general statement.

I agree that Rees is a winner obviously, hence the banners and so-forth at Sixers games. I love the guy. But to say that he is more of a "winner" than Andrew Gaze, I think even Reesy would laugh at the suggestion.

ELG, I never attack your posts (cough,cough)

A 'little light' you say greenback? I guess we'll see...

Hoop Addict makes my point better than I could. I think two championships in a career does make a winner. Many players would be happy with one.

Yea i'm with DoctorE, i'd doubt Lindsay before Andrew. The Tigers teams that featured Gaze/Copeland/Bradtke to the exclusion of almost every other player on the roster never played all that much defense.

Westover kept the shuffle offense but he has clearly made the team better defensively. Tho maybe that is just the players, because a Dmac/Thomas backcourt is far superior defensively to Gaze/Copeland.

When you think basketball in Australia, you think Andrew Gaze. That should say something about the man and his abilities.

With Anstey though, do you think he could possibly get another NBA shot at this stage of his career?

Rees is like longley, fortunate enough to be surrounded by talented.... im still shocked he made the 94 boomers team! they shouldvce dug bogut up from his tonka trucks and got him in there!

Gaze is to Australian Basketball as Bradman is to Cricket

simple as that


why even bother bringing this up its just a retorical (how ever you spell it) argument, if buts and what

Kobe81...

Gaze is, and will always be, the man for many, many more reasons than merely his ring count.

I find it funny that a guy with the name of Kobe81 is saying that someone else is not a winner. I would consider Gaze more of a winner than Kobe Bryant.