GOAT Shares (or GOAT Number)
 

First off, here's the ranking followed by number of GOAT Shares for that player:

Michael Jordan - 14.1
Bill Russell - 13.4
LeBron James - 12.8
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar - 9.2
Magic Johnson - 8.1
Larry Bird - 7.6
Shaquille O'Neal - 7.4
Tim Duncan - 7.3
Wilt Chamberlain - 6.9
Kobe Bryant - 6.1

That's the top 10, here's the next 5:

Kevin Durant - 5.2
Hakeem Olajuwon - 4.6
Karl Malone - 4.3
Moses Malone - 3.8
Giannis - 3.8 (as of end of '22 regular season)


So, what are "GOAT Shares"? It's my semi-arbitrary name for a number with two components: (1) [URL="https://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/nba_mvp_shares.html"]Career NBA MVP Award Shares[/URL] and (2) Number of [URL="https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/"]NBA Finals MVPs won[/URL].

I modified this basic concept in the following two ways: (1) I made an effort to "normalize" pre-1980s MVP Shares to post-1980 points counting, assigning a .8 for 1st place finishes, .6 for 2nd place finishes, .4 for 3rd place finishes, etc. for Russell, Wilt, and Kareem. This moves these players' actual MVP shares to "normalized" MVP shares as follows: from 4.7 to 6.4 for Russell, from 4.1 to 4.9 for Wilt, and from 6.1 to 7.2 from Kareem. The other modification is: (2) Pre-1969 NBA Finals MVPs are estimates, such that Russell has 7 and Wilt has a total of 2 ('72 actual, '67 estimated). (Also, for Giannis, I am using a probably conservative estimate of .5 Award Shares for the official '22 MVP voting.)

These totals above do not adjust for what competition for Award Share a given player had for his prime MVP-contending seasons, and so it probably overstates Kareem's 1st component considerably given that he had no Wilt- or Russell-level player to take a lot of MVP share from him as they did with one another. Or how Larry's MVP seasons were before Jordan emerged whereas Magic had to compete against prime MJ and prime Larry in '87 and '88. I don't know how to properly adjust for that issue at this point.

Breaking down by 20-year era, the rankings are as follows:

'60-79:
Russell - 13.4
Kareem - 9.2
Wilt - 6.9

'80-99:
MJ - 14.1
Magic - 8.1
Larry - 7.6
Hakeem - 4.6
Karl - 4.3
Moses - 3.8

'00-19:
LeBron - 12.8
Shaq - 7.4
Tim - 7.3
Kobe - 6.2
KD - 5.2

I guess you could also refer to this as a player's GOAT Number. I might also make adjustments for GOAT Number per game, since MJ's number is limited by a couple or few points just because of less playing time and not because of not being that much more dominant. It's not hard to imagine a Jordan playing a fuller career ending up with 10 Award Shares and 1 or 2 more Finals MVPs which would push his GOAT Number past 18, etc. etc :popcorn:

[QUOTE=GOATcards;18162912]First off, here's the ranking followed by number of GOAT Shares for that player:

Michael Jordan - 14.1
Bill Russell - 13.4
LeBron James - 12.8
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar - 9.2
Magic Johnson - 8.1
Larry Bird - 7.6
Shaquille O'Neal - 7.4
Tim Duncan - 7.3
Wilt Chamberlain - 6.9
Kobe Bryant - 6.1

That's the top 10, here's the next 5:

Kevin Durant - 5.2
Hakeem Olajuwon - 4.6
Karl Malone - 4.3
Moses Malone - 3.8
Giannis - 3.8 (as of end of '22 regular season)


So, what are "GOAT Shares"? It's my semi-arbitrary name for a number with two components: (1) [URL="https://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/nba_mvp_shares.html"]Career NBA MVP Award Shares[/URL] and (2) Number of [URL="https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/"]NBA Finals MVPs won[/URL].

I modified this basic concept in the following two ways: (1) I made an effort to "normalize" pre-1980s MVP Shares to post-1980 points counting, assigning a .8 for 1st place finishes, .6 for 2nd place finishes, .4 for 3rd place finishes, etc. for Russell, Wilt, and Kareem. This moves these players' actual MVP shares to "normalized" MVP shares as follows: from 4.7 to 6.4 for Russell, from 4.1 to 4.9 for Wilt, and from 6.1 to 7.2 from Kareem. The other modification is: (2) Pre-1969 NBA Finals MVPs are estimates, such that Russell has 7 and Wilt has a total of 2 ('72 actual, '67 estimated). (Also, for Giannis, I am using a probably conservative estimate of .5 Award Shares for the official '22 MVP voting.)

These totals above do not adjust for what competition for Award Share a given player had for his prime MVP-contending seasons, and so it probably overstates Kareem's 1st component considerably given that he had no Wilt- or Russell-level player to take a lot of MVP share from him as they did with one another. Or how Larry's MVP seasons were before Jordan emerged whereas Magic had to compete against prime MJ and prime Larry in '87 and '88. I don't know how to properly adjust for that issue at this point.

Breaking down by 20-year era, the rankings are as follows:

'60-79:
Russell - 13.4
Kareem - 9.2
Wilt - 6.9

'80-99:
MJ - 14.1
Magic - 8.1
Larry - 7.6
Hakeem - 4.6
Karl - 4.3
Moses - 3.8

'00-19:
LeBron - 12.8
Shaq - 7.4
Tim - 7.3
Kobe - 6.2
KD - 5.2

I guess you could also refer to this as a player's GOAT Number. I might also make adjustments for GOAT Number per game, since MJ's number is limited by a couple or few points just because of less playing time and not because of not being that much more dominant. It's not hard to imagine a Jordan playing a fuller career ending up with 10 Award Shares and 1 or 2 more Finals MVPs which would push his GOAT Number past 18, etc. etc :popcorn:[/QUOTE]

No George Mikan?

He was the dominant player on the first league dynasty, that's one big flaw I see already with this list.

[QUOTE=GOATcards;18162912]
Michael Jordan - 14.1
Bill Russell - 13.4
LeBron James - 12.8
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar - 9.2
Magic Johnson - 8.1
Larry Bird - 7.6
Shaquille O'Neal - 7.4
Tim Duncan - 7.3
Wilt Chamberlain - 6.9
Kobe Bryant - 6.1
[/QUOTE]

That's actually a pretty damn good and accurate Top 10 All Time list right there.

The top 2 would be my top 2 all time as well

I think it's interesting that the Lakers have 2 pairs in the top 10. I wonder if they helped each other by producing wins that they otherwise wouldn't have got with lesser teammates OR did they hold each other back stat and award wise. I don't know the answer.

But it is impressive to be one of the other 6 that got there without a top 10 helper.

84-92 Bird, Magic, and MJ each won 3 mvps. I would estimate that's the greatest 9 year run in the history of basketball and they played to a draw. 3 each.

What’s their WAR numbers and their +/- That’s the real numbers

Not a terrible way to look at things.

A few big takeways:

With more teams and more players in the NBA, Finals MVPs are tougher to come by. I think it's safe to say that Russell wouldn't have any many titles if he were playing in a league with more than 8 or 9 teams. That being said, he won them and I think that's what this is trying to capture.

Which is another reason why I'd be careful with that MJ adjustment you talked about. It's hard to assume things could happen if they didn't. Maybe MJ wins 2 more titles and wins 8 in a row, but maybe he tears his ACL, or Scottie wanted to leave after #4. We don't know so it probably makes sense to stick to what actually happened.

If bird , magic , Jordan were in their prime. Jordan would not win 6. Like when Sugar Ray, Hearns , Duran and Hagler could not go undefeated cause they all fought each other in their primes. Mayweather would never go undefeated if he fought those 4 in their primes.

We can dream.:)!

So nuance with MVP win shares, then a blunt instrument with Finals MVP

There being more teams and players haven’t stopped Lebron and Brady in two different sports from playing for double digit championships. They just didn’t win them all. But the opportunity was there.

Russell had the opportunity just like the other players in his era. He won. They didn’t. His teams were 10-0 in game 7s so it’s odd to me that they were pushed to that many if they were so overwhelmingly loaded like people like to think. Shouldn’t have been in any game 7s if it was as easy as it sounds.

Everyone has the same chance in their era. What they accomplish is up to them mostly.

For those interested there's an ongoing project on another message board where each year an all-season Player of the Year is chosen analogously to the MVP but taking the playoffs into account to.

In [URL="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1xw4w7bagkbIrOUfJXcqoBimETrbWHKNfx8UU8i6fzo8/edit?usp=sharing"]this spreadsheet[/URL], you'll find that compiled into POY shares using the same weighting as the MVP.

It only goes back to the start of the Shot Clock era (and only includes the NBA & ABA), so no Mikan. Here's the top players on the leaderboard so that you don't have to click:

1. Bill Russell 10.956
2. LeBron James 10.892
3. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar 10.221
4. Michael Jordan 9.578
5. Wilt Chamberlain 7.818
6. Magic Johnson 7.114
7. Tim Duncan 6.409
8. Larry Bird 6.147
9. Shaquille O'Neal 5.974
10. Julius Erving 5.046

Incidentally, I've recently created my own individual rough draft version that goes back to World War II (which I think is actually a much more meaningful dividing line than the Shot Clock for a variety of reasons) and isn't just limited to NBA/ABA (though it still has something of an American supremacist perspective admittedly). Going to go through it again before I share my results, but I can comment on either that or the original group project if there are questions.

[QUOTE=GOATcards;18162912]
I guess you could also refer to this as a player's GOAT Number. I might also make adjustments for GOAT Number per game, since MJ's number is limited by a couple or few points just because of less playing time and not because of not being that much more dominant. It's not hard to imagine a Jordan playing a fuller career ending up with 10 Award Shares and 1 or 2 more Finals MVPs which would push his GOAT Number past 18, etc. etc :popcorn:[/QUOTE]


Very cool GOATcards!

[QUOTE=Tallboy;18164754]For those interested there's an ongoing project on another message board where each year an all-season Player of the Year is chosen analogously to the MVP but taking the playoffs into account to.

In [URL="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1xw4w7bagkbIrOUfJXcqoBimETrbWHKNfx8UU8i6fzo8/edit?usp=sharing"]this spreadsheet[/URL], you'll find that compiled into POY shares using the same weighting as the MVP.

It only goes back to the start of the Shot Clock era (and only includes the NBA & ABA), so no Mikan. Here's the top players on the leaderboard so that you don't have to click:

1. Bill Russell 10.956
2. LeBron James 10.892
3. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar 10.221
4. Michael Jordan 9.578
5. Wilt Chamberlain 7.818
6. Magic Johnson 7.114
7. Tim Duncan 6.409
8. Larry Bird 6.147
9. Shaquille O'Neal 5.974
10. Julius Erving 5.046

Incidentally, I've recently created my own individual rough draft version that goes back to World War II (which I think is actually a much more meaningful dividing line than the Shot Clock for a variety of reasons) and isn't just limited to NBA/ABA (though it still has something of an American supremacist perspective admittedly). Going to go through it again before I share my results, but I can comment on either that or the original group project if there are questions.[/QUOTE]

Nice system, so is there like a quick way of calculating the POY Shares for the top 10 seasons for each player? I'm thinking MJ comes out on top but on the other hand, due to era, Russell simply had a smaller number of top competitors to grab share from him. And for reasons stated earlier I think Kareem's raw Award Shares are likely inflated a point or two by lack of legendary rivals in his prime years. (MJ was beaten out for MVP by the likes of Magic, Karl and Chuck, all of them first-team Dream Teamers, and then Kareem's top competition for MVP were...Cowens, McAdoo, Walton...they don't all exactly show up in the elite ranks on The Athletic's list, say (although Walton might have with a reasonably healthy career).

I do think that the system you use gives better ranking to Wilt than mine does, which is part of why I'm asking to see comparisons of each player's totaled-up top 10 seasons. Still, I don't see an obvious/quick/easy fix to the whole Kareem's-"rivals" issue using either measure. (As I've also said recently, I put Kareem and Wilt on the same "HOF/GOAT tier" with Magic and Tim, so somewhere in the #4-7 range for each of those players.)

[QUOTE=Zedlaw;18164406]So nuance with MVP win shares, then a blunt instrument with Finals MVP[/QUOTE]

I'd say it tries to preserve simplicity in both cases, and so much of GOAT debate revolves around which players were the most key in winning the most championships, in which case Finals MVPs won is a crucial gauge.

As I also said there are shortcomings to the MVP Shares as far as era-dependent competition goes, and the same would go for the raw number of Finals MVPs won, which is why I also provided a breakdown by 20-year eras. It could be that Shaq and Timmy belong closer to top-5 discussions than they usually are?

[QUOTE=GOATcards;18165049]Nice system, so is there like a quick way of calculating the POY Shares for the top 10 seasons for each player? I'm thinking MJ comes out on top but on the other hand, due to era, Russell simply had a smaller number of top competitors to grab share from him. And for reasons stated earlier I think Kareem's raw Award Shares are likely inflated a point or two by lack of legendary rivals in his prime years. (MJ was beaten out for MVP by the likes of Magic, Karl and Chuck, all of them first-team Dream Teamers, and then Kareem's top competition for MVP were...Cowens, McAdoo, Walton...they don't all exactly show up in the elite ranks on The Athletic's list, say (although Walton might have with a reasonably healthy career).

I do think that the system you use gives better ranking to Wilt than mine does, which is part of why I'm asking to see comparisons of each player's totaled-up top 10 seasons. Still, I don't see an obvious/quick/easy fix to the whole Kareem's-"rivals" issue using either measure. (As I've also said recently, I put Kareem and Wilt on the same "HOF/GOAT tier" with Magic and Tim, so somewhere in the #4-7 range for each of those players.)[/QUOTE]

It could be done with Google Sheets logic as the shares were calculated, but it's not something that I've done.

Certainly systems like these overrate those who faced weaker competition and/or underrate those who faced stronger competition. This is one of several reasons why I don't consider a metric like this suitable for a GOAT list, but it can give a certain baseline, and of course when you actually go through year-by-year, you learn a lot about the players.

Additionally I want to make clear that while I did contribute to the vote, these total values represent a group's effort and I certainly think some players got overrated/underrated relative to their contemporaries based on my own opinions which naturally at times deviate from others.

[QUOTE=Tallboy;18164754]For those interested there's an ongoing project on another message board where each year an all-season Player of the Year is chosen analogously to the MVP but taking the playoffs into account to.

In [URL="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1xw4w7bagkbIrOUfJXcqoBimETrbWHKNfx8UU8i6fzo8/edit?usp=sharing"]this spreadsheet[/URL], you'll find that compiled into POY shares using the same weighting as the MVP.

It only goes back to the start of the Shot Clock era (and only includes the NBA & ABA), so no Mikan. Here's the top players on the leaderboard so that you don't have to click:

1. Bill Russell 10.956
2. LeBron James 10.892
3. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar 10.221
4. Michael Jordan 9.578
5. Wilt Chamberlain 7.818
6. Magic Johnson 7.114
7. Tim Duncan 6.409
8. Larry Bird 6.147
9. Shaquille O'Neal 5.974
10. Julius Erving 5.046

Incidentally, I've recently created my own individual rough draft version that goes back to World War II (which I think is actually a much more meaningful dividing line than the Shot Clock for a variety of reasons) and isn't just limited to NBA/ABA (though it still has something of an American supremacist perspective admittedly). Going to go through it again before I share my results, but I can comment on either that or the original group project if there are questions.[/QUOTE]

In terms of a player's ten best seasons by POY Shares, the three I'm most interested in come out as follows:

Jordan - 9.288
James - 9.016
Russell - 9.011

MJ: :flex:

[QUOTE=GOATMJ;18163965]That's actually a pretty damn good and accurate Top 10 All Time list right there.[/QUOTE]

It's highly dependent on being in the NBA finals. That said, Jordan and Russell excepted you could reverse it and it would still work. Margins are thin and subjective.

[URL="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1xw4w7bagkbIrOUfJXcqoBimETrbWHKNfx8UU8i6fzo8/edit#gid=1070121545"]The POY Award Shares leaders:[/URL]

1 10.956 Bill Russell
2 10.919 LeBron James
3 10.221 Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
4 9.578 Michael Jordan
5 7.818 Wilt Chamberlain
6 7.114 Magic Johnson
7 6.409 Tim Duncan
8 6.147 Larry Bird
9 5.794 Shaquille O'Neal
10 5.046 Julius Erving
11 4.649 Karl Malone
12 4.466 Bob Pettit
13 4.413 Oscar Robertson
14 4.380 Hakeem Olajuwon
15 4.322 Kobe Bryant
16 3.979 Steph Curry
17 3.795 Jerry West
18 3.512 Kevin Garnett
19 3.478 Moses Malone
20 3.345 Nikola Jokic
21 2.965 Kevin Durant
22 2.616 Giannis Antetokounmpo
23 2.601 Dwyane Wade
24 2.557 Chris Paul
25 2.441 Dirk Nowitzki
26 2.431 David Robinson
27 2.223 Elgin Baylor
28 2.176 Dolph Schayes
29 2.087 James Harden
30 2.061 Walt Frazier
31 2.029 Charles Barkley
32 1.582 George Gervin
33 1.402 Bob McAdoo
34 1.373 Bill Walton
35 1.315 Kawhi Leonard
36 1.313 Steve Nash
37 1.245 Anthony Davis
38 1.187 Rick Barry
39 1.115 Bob Cousy
40 1.104 Dwight Howard
41 1.095 Neil Johnston
42 1.087 Patrick Ewing
43 1.033 Paul Arizin
44 0.894 Joel Embiid
45 0.843 Alonzo Mourning
46 0.769 Tracy McGrady
47 0.751 Gary Payton
48 0.726 Russell Westbrook
49 0.705 Jayson Tatum
50 0.684 Willis Reed
51 0.682 Jimmy Butler

I'd say this is a good list - the main reason MJ doesn't top the list is "lack of longevity" including taking nearly 2 full seasons off in his prime.

The way to make this list better is to apply a timeline/difficulty adjustment of some kind. I propose a deduction for each number of years born prior to 1990. (This means Giannis and Jokic get a bit of a boost.) The key issue there is how much of a timeline adjustment to apply. For the time being I'll settle on 1 "point" deducted for every 20 years before 1990 a player was born. For Russell it means a 2.8 point deduction.

The adjusted score/shares for the top players:

LeBron - 10.619
Mike - 8.228
Mr. Russell - 8.156
Kareem - 8.071
Timmy - 5.709
Magic - 5.564
Wilt - 5.118
Shaq - 4.894
Larry - 4.447
Steph - 3.969
Joker - 3.595
Karl - 3.299
Kobe - 3.122
Doctor - 3.046
Hakeem - 3.030
KD - 2.955
Giannis - 2.816
KG - 2.812
CP3 - 2.307
Wade - 2.201
Beard - 2.037
Dirk - 1.841
Oscar - 1.813
Moses - 1.728
Pettit - 1.566
AD - 1.395
Kawhi - 1.365
Logo - 1.195
Admiral - 1.181
Jayson - 1.105
Troel - 1.094
Dwight - .854
Chuck - .679
Jimmy - .632
Russ - .626
Steve - .513
TMac - .219

The rest are negative-territory losers and/or the timeline adjustment makes things weirder among those with lesser POY shares
(Given that weirdness the better adjustment might be some percentage of the shares based on birth year.)

How many more or these threads do we need?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

POY shares adjusted by 10% for every 20 years before 1990 the player is born (.5% per year). Note the considerable drop-off after Chuck at #31 in the original POY shares ranking. No one else in the ranking below is over 1.5 adjusted POY shares.

Given the size of the player pool/top talent competing for "award" shares, the timeline adjustment here should probably be even larger. All else equal, a player pool size of 1/2 another player pool size should result in adjusted POY shares halved. (I think.) Mr. Russell has his shares reduced by only 28% with the adjustment I applied.

LeBron - 10.591
Mike - 8.285
Kareem - 8.023
Mr. Russell - 7.888
Magic - 6.603
Timmy - 5.960
Wilt - 5.707
Shaq - 5.273
Larry - 5.102
Kobe - 4.063
Doc - 4.037
Karl - 4.021
Chef - 3.939
Hakeem - 3.789
Joker - 3.429
KG - 3.266
Oscar - 3.266
Pettit - 3.216
KD - 2.935
Moses - 2.869
Jerry - 2.808
Giannis - 2.668
Wade - 2.497
CP3 - 2.493
Dirk - 2.295
Admiral - 2.127
Beard - 2.077
Chuck - 1.755
Elgin - 1.601
Walt - 1.597
Dolph - 1.501


With a more aggressive 1%-per-year adjustment, this is the result:

Bron - 10.264
Mike - 6.992
Kareem - 5.826
Timmy - 5.512
Magic - 4.909
Mr. Russell - 4.821
Shaq - 4.751
Larry - 4.057
Chef - 3.899
Kobe - 3.803
Wilt - 3.596
Joker - 3.512
Karl - 3.394
Hakeem - 3.197
Doc - 3.028
KG - 3.020
KD - 2.906
Giannis - 2.721

I'd say this ranking looks more properly distributed across eras. There should also be some way to adjust for the caliber of competition for award/POY shares given that Kareem's next-best competition for POY share is Doc, while, e.g., Timmy is competing with Shaq, Kobe and KG.

(I think Timmy is probably a top-3 player all-time after the proper adjustments....)

I admire the time and work you put into this.

One suggestion - add a negative point factor for finals series losses.

[QUOTE=hermanotarjeta;19365775]I admire the time and work you put into this.

One suggestion - add a negative point factor for finals series losses.[/QUOTE]

right on cue :cry:

also adjustments for Shaqtin' highlights and flops and number of teams hopped around to. we'll get Bron ranked lower yet

[QUOTE=GOATcards;19365784]right on cue :cry:

also adjustments for Shaqtin' highlights and flops and number of teams hopped around to. we'll get Bron ranked lower yet[/QUOTE]

That’s how we evolve.

[QUOTE=6celtics33;18164686]Russell had the opportunity just like the other players in his era. He won. They didn’t. His teams were 10-0 in game 7s so it’s odd to me that they were pushed to that many if they were so overwhelmingly loaded like people like to think. Shouldn’t have been in any game 7s if it was as easy as it sounds.

Everyone has the same chance in their era. What they accomplish is up to them mostly.[/QUOTE]

Russell had the talent advantage every series his team played. His teams were stacked with HOFers yet still lost twice. Even in 1969 the Celtics had 5 HOFers, Russell, Havlicek, Sam Jones, Bailey Howell and Satch Sanders to the Lakers 3. The Celtics were always the more talented, deeper team.

They also won titles by winning 2 series instead of the modern day 4. It is a lot easier to 7 or 8 games instead of 15 or 16. The most wins it took for them to win a ring was 12.

What a waste of a thread! Now do a list off of pure basketball skill and talent it will be Jordan 1a and Kobe 1b then fill in the rest! These nerd formulas are so funny. Guys who never picked up a basketball much less can shoot one always compose these lists!

I love the smell of cognitive dissonance in the morning. It smells like...victory

[QUOTE=rats60;19366797]Russell had the talent advantage every series his team played. His teams were stacked with HOFers yet still lost twice. Even in 1969 the Celtics had 5 HOFers, Russell, Havlicek, Sam Jones, Bailey Howell and Satch Sanders to the Lakers 3. The Celtics were always the more talented, deeper team.
[/quote]

Not to mention having Mr. Russell as their coach. I wonder if Red considered him a worthy successor

I wonder which player the other players would prefer as their teammate/leader, Russell or Wilt

I wonder whether quantity of HOFers on a team is as important as quality. Just a season or two ago the Fakers had 5 future HOFers on their team at once, only 2 of whom were integral to getting them to the WCF

No one today has heard of Satch Sanders, only a few have heard of Bailey Howell. (I don't even know jackpoop about Dolph Schayes aside from sharing the same first name with Dolph Lundgren who I think played the Russian in Rocky 3? [Oops, Rocky 3 was the one with the Hulkster])

[quote]They also won titles by winning 2 series instead of the modern day 4. It is a lot easier to 7 or 8 games instead of 15 or 16. The most wins it took for them to win a ring was 12.[/QUOTE]

So easy to do all that winning that your GOAT did how much winning? How much winning did your GOAT and the Logo do together, even after Mr. Russell left the scene. 1 chip in 5 seasons. He did block Kareem's skyhook some number of times though, that was neat

Bad, context-selective arguments seem to be your stock in trade

[QUOTE=Hellcat;19366980]What a waste of a thread! Now do a list off of pure basketball skill and talent it will be Jordan 1a and Kobe 1b then fill in the rest! These nerd formulas are so funny. Guys who never picked up a basketball much less can shoot one always compose these lists![/QUOTE]

Since when did pure talent translate into greatness? Since when does pure talent get defined in terms of what MJ/Kobe are especially talented at? Who else has Jokic's talent for reading the court, the development of plays? Or Russell or Timmy's talent for leadership?

I seem to recall shooting around for maybe hundreds of hours as a kid, and learned in anything like challenging competition that I wasn't cut out for it.

Bad, context-selective arguments seem to be your stock in trade

All's I knows is, combine talent and longevity and do a fair timeline adjustment and the numbers say that Bron is easily the GOAT. He's far and away the leader in career regular season and playoff VORP. (MJ's playoff BPM however is still tops.) 4 Finals MVPs in the most competitive era yet is hard to beat. He was the best player in 3 Finals series he lost. (Okay so arguably Durant was tied with him as best in 2 of them.)

Numbers-wise I don't think there's a question. (Like with Ted Williams the analysts are left "filling in the gaps" of missed seasons for MJ.) It's other, less numbers-related issues that don't have a consensus sold on him as GOAT over MJ. I for one find it exceedingly difficult to reconcile the amount of his appearance on Shaqtin' a Fool with the status of Greatest of All Time. I might otherwise accept that his 2011 Finals choke was a learning-curve thing redeemed by monster Finals showings later. I might even consider his flopping reels to be contextualized somehow to the cynicism introduced by bad officiating. But the Shaqtin' showings are inexcusable, same with the Beard.

[QUOTE=GOATcards;19367038]Not to mention having Mr. Russell as their coach. I wonder if Red considered him a worthy successor

I wonder which player the other players would prefer as their teammate/leader, Russell or Wilt

[/QUOTE]

Red Auerbach tried to get Wilt on the Celtics. Out of high school he recruited Wilt to go to college in Boston so the Celtics would have his draft rights. After Wilt picked Kansas, meaning Philadelphia would have his draft rights, Auerbach traded for Bill Russell.

[QUOTE=rats60;19367228]Red Auerbach tried to get Wilt on the Celtics. Out of high school he recruited Wilt to go to college in Boston so the Celtics would have his draft rights. After Wilt picked Kansas, meaning Philadelphia would have his draft rights, Auerbach traded for Bill Russell.[/QUOTE]

Might Red's perspective have shifted by a few years later? Is that context that might have mattered to this point, and which makes no sense whatsoever not to bring up?

[QUOTE=GOATcards;19367242]Might Red's perspective have shifted by a few years later? Is that context that might have mattered to this point, and which makes no sense whatsoever not to bring up?[/QUOTE]

No it doesn't because it is all speculation. Do you think Red's later opinions are going to be biased against a guy who said no to him? I have just posted facts. I am sorry you can't handle the truth.

Wilt did well with Alex Hannum and Bill Sherman as his coaches. Wilt clashed with others who Wilt thought were bad coaches.

[QUOTE=Hellcat;19366980]What a waste of a thread! Now do a list off of pure basketball skill and talent it will be Jordan 1a and Kobe 1b then fill in the rest! These nerd formulas are so funny. Guys who never picked up a basketball much less can shoot one always compose these lists![/QUOTE]


Pure talent and skill,top 10 in no particular order,Wilt,Oscar,Jordan,Kareem,Kobe,Magic,Russell,Bird,DR.J,West.Nobody still playing should be on the list.Though if someone put James on kinda hard to argue.

[URL="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1xw4w7bagkbIrOUfJXcqoBimETrbWHKNfx8UU8i6fzo8/edit?gid=1368930863#gid=1368930863"]RealGM POY Shares for 2023-24 season
[/URL]

Top 5
Jokic - .765
Doncic - .659
SGA - .647
Tatum - .259
Brunson - .147

Then for the non-nerds we who played the game and use our eyeballs to judge the list would be vastly different. MJ 1a Kobe 1b those 2 players are easily the most talented to ever lace them up.

[QUOTE=Hellcat;19527772]Then for the non-nerds we who played the game and use our eyeballs to judge the list would be vastly different. MJ 1a Kobe 1b those 2 players are easily the most talented to ever lace them up.[/QUOTE]

:cry:

[QUOTE=Hellcat;19527772]Then for the non-nerds we who played the game and use our eyeballs to judge the list would be vastly different. MJ 1a Kobe 1b those 2 players are easily the most talented to ever lace them up.[/QUOTE]
The curious case of Kobe Bryant…

I don’t agree with you labeling him 1B, but I was once in the camp that thought he was overrated, now I believe he’s being underrated. He was once being compared to Jordan, but now somehow a number of fans are leaving him off their top 10 lists.

Three all time Laker greats (West, Magic, and Shaq) are on record saying that Kobe is the greatest Laker of all time. If you Google “greatest Laker of all time”, you will find that most of the lists have Kobe at the top. Both Magic and Kobe played their entire careers for the Lakers. So if Kobe was a better Laker than Magic (Magic believes he is), it stands to reason he’s also the better overall player. Why then do so many fans have Magic ahead of Kobe on an all time NBA greatest players list?

There’s a narrative that Kobe was somehow carried by Shaq in those first three championships. It’s as if nobody wants to give Kobe any credit for the Lakers’ Threepeat. But the only one you can really make that argument for would be the first one against Indiana. Shaq absolutely dominated in that series with an average Game Score of 30.6. Kobe had an average Game Score in that series of just 9.7, and missed one game.

However, the same can not be said for the other two championships. Shaq was still the best player, but Kobe was more than just a sidekick. In the WCF in 2001, Kobe was the best player on the court leading the Lakers to a four game sweep against a Spurs team that had the home court advantage and was led by Tim Duncan. His 25.4 average Game Score for the series led all players, and was the only one over 20. He also led all players in ppg with 33.3, and apg at 7.0. Although not as dominant in the 2002 WCF, there’s no way the Lakers beat the Kings in that series without Kobe.

I think part of the problem is the Lakers played some pretty weak opponents in the Finals, so there’s this perception that Shaq could've won without Kobe. But getting there was a lot tougher than most fans remember. They had to beat a 59 win Trailblazers team in a series that went seven games. The 61 win Kings team also took them to seven games. They also had to beat two 58 win Spurs teams. It’s pretty obvious the Lakers were not threepeating without Kobe. Shaq has even said that Kobe carried the load on many occasions during that Lakers’ run.

It’s also worth noting that Shaq couldn’t win anything before teaming up with Kobe, despite having Penny Hardaway and some decent supporting casts. In fact he was swept three times in the playoffs as a member of the Magic. The only championship he ever won without Kobe was with the Heat. But in this series, Wade had arguably a top 10 all time Finals performance with an average Game Score of 25.4. He led all scorers by a mile in that series averaging 34.7 a game. Shaq meanwhile posted a very mediocre average Game Score of just 9.6. That’s actually a tick below Kobe’s average Game Score of 9.7 in their first championship together. And yet I’ve never heard anyone not give Shaq full credit for this championship despite clearly being carried by Wade.

Kobe on the other hand led his teams to two championships without Shaq. Despite getting strong contributions from Pau Gasol, Kobe was the best player on these teams. Let’s also throw in the fact that he beat two teams that defeated LeBron’s Cavs in the playoffs.

Fans need to stop underrating Kobe. He is absolutely a top 10 player, and a convincing argument can be made that he belongs in the top 5. I have a feeling that certain media personalities are the reason that Kobe is being underrated. In order to push this LeBron is the GOAT narrative, they needed to show that he had surpassed Kobe. They did a pretty good job of convincing many fans that there’s this huge gap between the two players. In my opinion that gap isn’t as big as some think. I give LeBron the edge, but I think it’s much closer than others seem to think.

A few other things to add: Kobe scored the most points in NBA history in a single decade, and he did it in the 2000's which was the most difficult decade to score points in. He was also instrumental in returning Gold to Team USA in 2008 after both Duncan and LeBron failed to do so in 2004.

[QUOTE=robert0629;19527842]
There’s a narrative that Kobe was somehow carried by Shaq in those first three championships. It’s as if nobody wants to give Kobe any credit for the Lakers’ Threepeat. But the only one you can really make that argument for would be the first one against Indiana. Shaq absolutely dominated in that series with an average Game Score of 30.6. Kobe had an average Game Score in that series of just 9.7, and missed one game.

However, the same can not be said for the other two championships. Shaq was still the best player, but Kobe was more than just a sidekick.[/QUOTE]

This kind of thing is interesting because in a way it just points to a difference in timing. Shaq, if he had had a mentor or partner such as he provided to Kobe, could have had a ring earlier in his career and then had another series of championships when he did.

But Kobe lucked out and had Shaq and was a great student, then great leader outright in his own right. So we cannot really say that either player was better. I like the fact that they shared the limelight, unlike say MJ. Is that better? You're trying to quantify something that is like a philosophic difference.

Definitely Kobe and Shaqs approach evolved the game in a way that seems to work better for a lot of teams, from the Warriors (Splash Brothers) to the current Celtics (Tatum and Brown). The Pacers actually take that to a next evolutionary level of having different stars every quarter, or at least every game. Why Haliburton collectors are constantly scratching their heads.

[QUOTE=GOATcards;19365716]
With a more aggressive 1%-per-year adjustment, this is the result:

Bron - 10.264
Mike - 6.992
Kareem - 5.826
Timmy - 5.512
Magic - 4.909
Mr. Russell - 4.821
Shaq - 4.751
Larry - 4.057
Chef - 3.899
Kobe - 3.803
Wilt - 3.596
Joker - 3.512
Karl - 3.394
Hakeem - 3.197
Doc - 3.028
KG - 3.020
KD - 2.906
Giannis - 2.721
[/QUOTE]

After the '24 [URL="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1xw4w7bagkbIrOUfJXcqoBimETrbWHKNfx8UU8i6fzo8/edit?gid=1070121545#gid=1070121545"]POY[/URL] shares are tallied, the significant change is with Joker:

Bron - 10.264
Mike - 6.992
Kareem - 5.826
Timmy - 5.512
Magic - 4.909
Mr. Russell - 4.821
Shaq - 4.751
Joker - 4.315
Larry - 4.057
Chef - 3.899
Kobe - 3.803
Wilt - 3.596
Karl - 3.394
Hakeem - 3.197
Doc - 3.028
KG - 3.020
KD - 2.906
Giannis - 2.721

since obviously this cannot be, the 1%-per-year timeline adjustment must be off, and/or this is just a ranking from ~14-18 RealGM gatekeepers who are obviously biased toward the no-defense-playing, 1-ring-only Joker; best to leave the voting up to the chatbots from now on

I guess Kobe is like Mantle in baseball, all time top 10 but one of the icons in the hobby

[QUOTE=Hellcat;19527772]Then for the non-nerds we who played the game and use our eyeballs to judge the list would be vastly different. MJ 1a Kobe 1b those 2 players are easily the most talented to ever lace them up.[/QUOTE]

My only wish is that I can one day meet hellcat irl on the court so I could literally dunk on him just like I virtually dunk all over his Kobe homer posts

[QUOTE=GOATcards;19656082]After the '24 [URL="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1xw4w7bagkbIrOUfJXcqoBimETrbWHKNfx8UU8i6fzo8/edit?gid=1070121545#gid=1070121545"]POY[/URL] shares are tallied, the significant change is with Joker:

Bron - 10.264
Mike - 6.992
Kareem - 5.826
Timmy - 5.512
Magic - 4.909
Mr. Russell - 4.821
Shaq - 4.751
Joker - 4.315
Larry - 4.057
Chef - 3.899
Kobe - 3.803
Wilt - 3.596
Karl - 3.394
Hakeem - 3.197
Doc - 3.028
KG - 3.020
KD - 2.906
Giannis - 2.721

since obviously this cannot be, the 1%-per-year timeline adjustment must be off, and/or this is just a ranking from ~14-18 RealGM gatekeepers who are obviously biased toward the no-defense-playing, 1-ring-only Joker; best to leave the voting up to the chatbots from now on[/QUOTE]

Bron by far top1, Timmy at 4th and Joker in front of Kobe makes this list a joke, is that the purpose of it or you really serious? Have you ever heard anyone saying that Tim Duncan is the GOAT?

[QUOTE=jcardstore;19656723]My only wish is that I can one day meet hellcat irl on the court so I could literally dunk on him just like I virtually dunk all over his Kobe homer posts[/QUOTE]
You could only be so lucky! I don't think we will ever cross paths though I'm in alot higher tax bracket! I dont ever make it to the hood! You could probably give me a tour though huh?! :cool:

[QUOTE=Hellcat;19658113]You could only be so lucky! I don't think we will ever cross paths though I'm in alot higher tax bracket! I dont ever make it to the hood! You could probably give me a tour though huh?! :cool:[/QUOTE]

I'm sure you are in a higher tax bracket than me but you know the only people who brag about their net worth online?

1) Small, insecure men
2) Broke people

Maybe you're just a small insecure man but you come off more as a wannabe, fake rich guy tbh

Bill Russell was considered the greatest defensive player to ever play while Wilt was easily the 2nd greatest. Wilt Dominated Russell in head to head matchups in every category but FT% & Wins because Bill had a HOF cast of teammates while Chamberlin with GSW didn’t have a teammate that could make the Celtics roster.

Wilt is easily the greatest / Most Dominant Offensive player. Not only could he score but was able to lead the league in assists.

Before Blocked shots were kept, the Lakers scorekeeper had Wilt as averaging 8 blocks PER GAME for his CAREER as a Laker. Russell was a MVP 5 x & was ALL NBA 1st 3x but only Twice during Wilt’s playing career. Wilt was voted 7 X on the ALL NBA 1st during Russell’s career with the bulk occurring when Bill was at his best. Something to ponder.

MJ, Russell, LeBron and all the rest needed help in attaining rings. Nobody was greater than Wilt, but he landed on a franchise that made the Bulls and Cavaliers look like yearly contenders before MJ & LeBron.

Old head post above me! See Babe Ruth analogy he played against a bunch of plumbers and electricians. Now granted further down the timeline but still apropo.

[QUOTE=Stifle;19658283]Bill Russell was considered the greatest defensive player to ever play while Wilt was easily the 2nd greatest. Wilt Dominated Russell in head to head matchups in every category but FT% & Wins because Bill had a HOF cast of teammates while Chamberlin with GSW didn’t have a teammate that could make the Celtics roster.

Wilt is easily the greatest / Most Dominant Offensive player. Not only could he score but was able to lead the league in assists.

Before Blocked shots were kept, the Lakers scorekeeper had Wilt as averaging 8 blocks PER GAME for his CAREER as a Laker. Russell was a MVP 5 x & was ALL NBA 1st 3x but only Twice during Wilt’s playing career. Wilt was voted 7 X on the ALL NBA 1st during Russell’s career with the bulk occurring when Bill was at his best. Something to ponder.

MJ, Russell, LeBron and all the rest needed help in attaining rings. Nobody was greater than Wilt, but he landed on a franchise that made the Bulls and Cavaliers look like yearly contenders before MJ & LeBron.[/QUOTE]
Why do you Wilt fans insist on lying about his teammates? In Wilt’s final season with the Warriors he went 10-28 for a .263 winning percentage before being traded midseason to the Sixers. The following season Rick Barry joined the Warriors. Playing with essentially the same group of players Wilt played with a year earlier, the Warriors went 35-45 for a .438 winning percentage. The following season they went 44-37 and made it all the way to the Finals. In the Finals they took two games from Wilt’s 68 win Sixers team that some Wilt fans claim is the greatest team of all time. In the sixth and final game of the series Barry’s Warriors held a 102-96 lead going into the fourth quarter. This series was much closer than some fans think.

If Barry could compete for an NBA Championship with these group of players, Jordan and LeBron would have had no problem doing the same.

[QUOTE=Stifle;19658283]Bill Russell was considered the greatest defensive player to ever play while Wilt was easily the 2nd greatest. Wilt Dominated Russell in head to head matchups in every category but FT% & Wins because Bill had a HOF cast of teammates while Chamberlin with GSW didn’t have a teammate that could make the Celtics roster.

Wilt is easily the greatest / Most Dominant Offensive player. Not only could he score but was able to lead the league in assists.

Before Blocked shots were kept, the Lakers scorekeeper had Wilt as averaging 8 blocks PER GAME for his CAREER as a Laker. Russell was a MVP 5 x & was ALL NBA 1st 3x but only Twice during Wilt’s playing career. Wilt was voted 7 X on the ALL NBA 1st during Russell’s career with the bulk occurring when Bill was at his best. Something to ponder.

MJ, Russell, LeBron and all the rest needed help in attaining rings. Nobody was greater than Wilt, but he landed on a franchise that made the Bulls and Cavaliers look like yearly contenders before MJ & LeBron.[/QUOTE]

The season after Wilt won his 3rd straight MVP he goes to the Lakers joining West and Baylor. They lose to the retiring Russell's Celts. The Celtics had Hondo and I can't name who else. Russell was the player-coach so maybe he had more going on than Wilt did in that dept.

Why didn't the Lakers pull it out that time? West was the series MVP after all

“Those f—ing balloons are staying up there.” —WFR, 5/5/69

[URL="https://chatgpt.com/share/6708bd2d-1984-8001-be43-d6251df669f3"]ChatGPT conversation about which players have the most compelling GOAT, top 3, top 5, etc. cases[/URL]

Notable how the rankings change around depending on the specific prompts

[IMG]https://i.imgur.com/y7XQOCr.jpeg[/IMG]

[QUOTE=GOATcards;19656082]After the '24 [URL="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1xw4w7bagkbIrOUfJXcqoBimETrbWHKNfx8UU8i6fzo8/edit?gid=1070121545#gid=1070121545"]POY[/URL] shares are tallied, the significant change is with Joker:

Bron - 10.264
Mike - 6.992
Kareem - 5.826
Timmy - 5.512
Magic - 4.909
Mr. Russell - 4.821
Shaq - 4.751
Joker - 4.315
Larry - 4.057
Chef - 3.899
Kobe - 3.803
Wilt - 3.596
Karl - 3.394
Hakeem - 3.197
Doc - 3.028
KG - 3.020
KD - 2.906
Giannis - 2.721

since obviously this cannot be, the 1%-per-year timeline adjustment must be off, and/or this is just a ranking from ~14-18 RealGM gatekeepers who are obviously biased toward the no-defense-playing, 1-ring-only Joker; best to leave the voting up to the chatbots from now on[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Torro;19658108]Bron by far top1, Timmy at 4th and Joker in front of Kobe makes this list a joke, is that the purpose of it or you really serious? Have you ever heard anyone saying that Tim Duncan is the GOAT?[/QUOTE]

Speaking for myself, I wouldn't dismiss a list or argument right off if it looks counter-intuitive; I would approach with skepticism and figure out why the discrepency between the intuitions and the list/arguments.

The RealGM gatekeepers have done a [URL="https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=2301069"]ranking[/URL] that puts MJ at #3 and I don't think that their consensus view gets it right. I don't think when building a franchise around a player that Kareem is the better pick over MJ. Their ranking appears to weight longevity a lot more than I would. MVP Award Shares and Finals performances are more significant there, and it's well-known how much of Kareem's MVP Shares/Awards are era-dependent. (Their raw [URL="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1xw4w7bagkbIrOUfJXcqoBimETrbWHKNfx8UU8i6fzo8"]Player of Year shares[/URL] also overrate him because of era effects for reasons I've mentioned earlier in the thread.)

Perhaps Tallboy (the chief curator of these projects at RealGM, I believe) can weigh in with insights if he's watching these days.

I'll try to keep things relatively short so I'll cut to the chase:

I think MJ has the most storied career of any of them. His 6-for-6 Finals showings is *with* nearly 2 full seasons taken off in the middle. He has no Finals chokes like LeBron, none of Bron's flop or blooper/Shaqtin' reels. I don't knock Bron in the least for team-hopping/ring-chasing, it's what anyone would do in his situation (Cavs game him bupkus to work with his first stretch there). But MJ, his highlight reels are the best, he didn't need longevity (career stat-padding) to prove himself, his Bulls had a higher [URL="https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/complete-history-of-the-nba/#bulls"]strength[/URL] rating in '93 than Hakeem's '94-95 [URL="https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/complete-history-of-the-nba/#rockets"]Rockets[/URL] by roughly 30 Elo points, his MVP Shares would very likely exceed Bron's if he didn't leave the league like he did, his (timeline-adjusted) POY Shares would be considerably closer. Even when he came back from baseball, he was dropping a double-nickle all of 5 games in. His career showed that his 63-point game against the '86 Celtics wasn't exactly a fluke.

His 2nd retirement also deprives him of more career accolades/stats/shares, and so? What more did he really need to do to prove his case?

Also of significance IMHO is his not feeling the need to crown himself the GOAT the way Bron did. When asked about the GOAT argument, MJ said "how do you compare across eras? Mr. Russell has 11 rings." Who knows what he's really thinking, but he basically lets his record speak for itself. This is also why I'm inclined to take Mr. Russell or Timmy in a hypothetical draft/build-around, their intangibles/personality are such that they don't need to do this self-crowning stuff. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe in the hypothetical timeline-adjusted league with hypothetical comparable supporting casts, Bron delivers more rings. MJ left that up to the imagination, Bron needs to tell you.

I don't think Joker's placement in the ranking above is a joke. Different eras. Ring counts these days especially need contextualizing. Bubblemurray showed up for all of 2 playoff runs, was injured for another 2 in between, and hasn't been voted All-Star or All-NBA. So there's that. The '23 playoff run showed what Joker is capable of with adequate support. We might not see a 3-time MVP again, given the talent (competition for awards/shares) the league has to draw from going forward.

possibly tangentially related, I picked up a few NBA books at impulse-buy retail price especially based on look, this is among them

[url]https://www.hachettebookgroup.com/titles/marcus-thompson/dynasties/9780762496297[/url]

the 10 dynasties are: Mikan Lakers, Russell Celts, Magic Lakers, Larry Celts, Bad Boys, MJ Bulls, Shaq and Kobe Lakers, Timmy Spurs, "King Dynasty," and Steph Warriors (near-dynasties are the last chapter: Dr. J Sixers, Hakeem Rockets, West Lakers, Miami Heatles, Lew Alcindor Bucks, Frazier Knicks)


[IMG]https://i.imgur.com/iD6AThO.jpeg[/IMG]

In [URL="https://chatgpt.com/share/675cb9b5-b288-8001-8a7a-66a3ea8411f6"]this ChatGPT drill-down[/URL] I manage to get it to produce a top-10 ranking nearly identical to my signature, although it doesn't quite remain consistent with additional prompts. The first half or so of this was already posted in another thread, but I just kept going. The ranking that was generated that was closest to mine was based on the prompt to rank players (after steelmanning each player's case and adjusting for era and team support quality) by propensity/contribution toward winning.