Top 50 player seasons, PLEASE READ pg 4 if you want to vote

[ardee]

The idea for an all time team was not all that popular, but DavidStern suggested a project instead to choose the top 50-100 player seasons of all time. It occured to me that would be a LOT more fun and interesting, as there are a plethora of seasons to choose from just to populate the top ten. Again, a good number of voters would be needed.

I can help manage the project as my summer break kicks off in less then one week. I would need voters to manage though. If anyone is interested please sign up here.

For a format, I thought we could follow the RGM Top 100 style, with everyone voting for one particular player season and nominating another. There are also two other ways to go about it:

1. Allow every player only one season. So, ie. only Jordan 91, Wilt 67, etc. make the list.

2. Any number of seasons per player (my preference, as it's a REAL top 100).

I hope the response for this will be good, the idea has a lot of promise.

[JordansBulls]

Considering how close we are to the playoffs I think this may be better after the playoffs are done this season so that if a guy like Durant or Wade or Lebron won the title then they could be somewhere in the top 100 seasons. Afterall I'm sure they will be in the top 100 somewhere.

[ardee]

Considering how close we are to the playoffs I think this may be better after the playoffs are done this season so that if a guy like Durant or Wade or Lebron won the title then they could be somewhere in the top 100 seasons. Afterall I'm sure they will be in the top 100 somewhere.

Well I'm sure we could start at the very least. I can't see any one of them being near the top 10-15. Btw has this been stickied?

[tclg]

I got time for this. but I think it would be better after the playoffs but how much time between rounds are you thinking of?

[JustCame]

I wouldn't know which one I'd prefer between options 1 and 2. 1 would allow for 100 players' best season, and 2 would include maybe 20-25 people. lol 2 would be more accurate in relation to the thread's title though.

I also agree with what has been said regarding the notion to wait until after the post season.

[HeartBreakKid]

It would be pretty hard to do, but informative and probably fun. I'd love to join. I'm still in the middle of reading the RGM Top 100 players and it is a good read for the most part.

[-Kees-]

Id offer my services regularly until August, when I will be busy for 11 months.

[Sinant]

I probably won't participate (my activity is too sporadic to do the project justice) but I would recommend going somewhere in the middle regarding multiple seasons from players. For example, if a player reaches 3(or 5) seasons on the list, they're "retired" and can no longer be used.

That way you get the truly spectacular seasons from the truly spectacular players AND more variety than it just being a "Well here's the best seasons from the Top 25 guys"

[therealbig3]

I personally think it should be option 2. Yeah, most of the seasons will be from players in the top 25, but it gives a chance to guys who may not be ranked that high overall to crack the list based on an all-time great peak season. For example, 03 McGrady and 77 Walton would easily make the list in that case, but they're not top 25 players all time (at least not to most people).

I guess the other way is good too...that would just be a list of the all-time best peak seasons, correct?

[lorak]

I personally think it should be option 2. Yeah, most of the seasons will be from players in the top 25, but it gives a chance to guys who may not be ranked that high overall to crack the list based on an all-time great peak season. For example, 03 McGrady and 77 Walton would easily make the list in that case, but they're not top 25 players all time (at least not to most people).

But option 1 gives even more chances to guys like Walton or Penny. Simply there would be more of them if we go by "one season per player" and that's IMO much more interesting. Option 2 is basically again talking about top players and only few outside of top 20 all time. I mean, Magic, KAJ, WIlt, Russell, MJ, Bird, Shaq, Duncan, Kobe, Malone - that's 10 players and they would have at least 50 seasons in top 100 if we chose option no 2.

[ardee]

I personally think it should be option 2. Yeah, most of the seasons will be from players in the top 25, but it gives a chance to guys who may not be ranked that high overall to crack the list based on an all-time great peak season. For example, 03 McGrady and 77 Walton would easily make the list in that case, but they're not top 25 players all time (at least not to most people).

But option 1 gives even more chances to guys like Walton or Penny. Simply there would be more of them if we go by "one season per player" and that's IMO much more interesting. Option 2 is basically again talking about top players and only few outside of top 20 all time. I mean, Magic, KAJ, WIlt, Russell, MJ, Bird, Shaq, Duncan, Kobe, Malone - that's 10 players and they would have at least 50 seasons in top 100 if we chose option no 2.

Walton is going to get his chance anyway. I think his '77 season is right up there with some of Russell's best. 03 T-Mac is also arguably a top 30 all time season if you take into account what a competitive seaosn it was, and the quality of his team-mates.

I would prefer this:

I probably won't participate (my activity is too sporadic to do the project justice) but I would recommend going somewhere in the middle regarding multiple seasons from players. For example, if a player reaches 3(or 5) seasons on the list, they're "retired" and can no longer be used.

That way you get the truly spectacular seasons from the truly spectacular players AND more variety than it just being a "Well here's the best seasons from the Top 25 guys"

Maybe a limit of five seasons per player, so we won't have literally every Jordan season from 85-98 on the list. It gives chances to the lesser players (Grant Hill!), but ensures that '90 gets recognition as much as '91 does.

[penbeast0]

I wouldn't go in between . . . either it should be 100 best seasons or the 100 top 1 season peaks (1/player); there's little value in having Jordan's 3rd best season v. Russell's 5th best type debates.

I'd go with the top 100 1 season peaks just because if we do it the other way, you are going to get the same debate about 30 times with the same arguments about how valuable Russell's defense was v. Kareem's offense and all that. The other way you get some variety at least (and maybe we can get Walt Bellamy and Wes Unseld's peak seasons in there).

[C-izMe]

I'm in. As for what type I say we allow three years for each player. Jordan's 88-91 years are too good to only be represented by 1 season. If we start at the beginning of the playoffs at a 2/3 player a week speed none of the current seasons should miss out barring legendary playoff performances.

[lorak]

I wouldn't go in between . . . either it should be 100 best seasons or the 100 top 1 season peaks (1/player); there's little value in having Jordan's 3rd best season v. Russell's 5th best type debates.

I'd go with the top 100 1 season peaks just because if we do it the other way, you are going to get the same debate about 30 times with the same arguments about how valuable Russell's defense was v. Kareem's offense and all that. The other way you get some variety at least (and maybe we can get Walt Bellamy and Wes Unseld's peak seasons in there).

+1

[C-izMe]

I wouldn't go in between . . . either it should be 100 best seasons or the 100 top 1 season peaks (1/player); there's little value in having Jordan's 3rd best season v. Russell's 5th best type debates.

I'd go with the top 100 1 season peaks just because if we do it the other way, you are going to get the same debate about 30 times with the same arguments about how valuable Russell's defense was v. Kareem's offense and all that. The other way you get some variety at least (and maybe we can get Walt Bellamy and Wes Unseld's peak seasons in there).

+1

But just going top 100 peaks will end up with a list very similar to the realgm top 100. It just seems redundant to me.
The other way we need a cap because no one wants to see 25 combined years of Jordan, Kareem, and Russell.

[JordansBulls]

I wouldn't go in between . . . either it should be 100 best seasons or the 100 top 1 season peaks (1/player); there's little value in having Jordan's 3rd best season v. Russell's 5th best type debates.

I'd go with the top 100 1 season peaks just because if we do it the other way, you are going to get the same debate about 30 times with the same arguments about how valuable Russell's defense was v. Kareem's offense and all that. The other way you get some variety at least (and maybe we can get Walt Bellamy and Wes Unseld's peak seasons in there).

+1

But just going top 100 peaks will end up with a list very similar to the realgm top 100. It just seems redundant to me.
The other way we need a cap because no one wants to see 25 combined years of Jordan, Kareem, and Russell.

Not sure any other way to go about it then. Let's say it is Kareem 1971 vs Russell 1965 and Kareem wins that one and then the next one is Kareem 1972 vs Russell 1965 and Kareem wins that? Not sure what is the correct approach to take in this one.

I think the best thing to do is maybe have a vote of what season is the best of said player. So for me for instance of all the MJ's which MJ season and player was the best? Compare himself to 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1996 and then pick one. If 1991 wins then that is the MJ you use.
Also I think it is more valuable to compare players who won the title to players that won the title (MJ 1991, Shaq 2000, Russell 1965, Kareem 1971, Wilt 1967, Magic 1987) and players that didn't win the title to players that didn't win the title. (Lebron 2009, Kareem 1977, Tmac 2003, Kobe 2006, Bird 1985, etc)

Here is an example of the player season ESPN used when picking the all time great teams

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/fe ... lineup/chi

1991 MJ was used

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/fe ... lineup/bos


1965 Russell and 1986 Bird


http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/fe ... lineup/lal

1987 Magic, 2000 Shaq


Also think the best way is to make it the years said player won the title that way we eliminate the saying this player won the title and this player didn't debates.

[tclg]

What about ranking the top MVP seasons

[ThaRegul8r]

If you put a cap on it, then you aren't truly talking about "the top 100 player seasons," but "the top 100 seasons by the top 100 players."

[JordansBulls]

What about ranking the top MVP seasons

Depends on how you want to list it. Is it in comparison with how much more so that so and so dominanted the league that season or in comparison with other greats?

[ardee]

If you put a cap on it, then you aren't truly talking about "the top 100 player seasons," but "the top 100 seasons by the top 100 players."

I concur. I say the top 100 seasons overall. Would rather 97 Jordan or 80 Kareem makes the list instead of something like 95 Penny.