I think it should actually be about who the best players are. Your legacy is highly dependent on what organization you end up on. And fans ask why guys are demanding trades.
wow. i totally disagree.
first of all, to some degree these goats all have to perform and performance is measured by numbers....that's sports. in a sense the top 100 players ALL bring numbers. you dont get in if you are a 7/8/6 31%/72% on a losing team your whole life. the very nature of a TEAM sport dictates you melding with others. and "BEST" cannot truly be compared across eras. it becomes a bias dictated by personal standards
i disagree with you because legacy is not numbers based. it is how you change the game. it is what you leave behind
for instance, lew alcindor changed the dunk rule in college ball not because he played on the bruins. he made winners out of every team he played with. he was a first in many areas
oscar was the first to give us a glimpse of what "skillset" was because he commanded so may skills we had to take notice
before drJ, the dunk was just a way to score 100% of the time when a players was close to the basket. just watch how players dunked before him. all they did was throw the ball down. actually i think the first big time dunker was the totally overlooked gus johnson. after the dr players used the dunk as their own personal signature
and on and on and on,,,but let's FIRST remind ourselves that you don't get noticed if you don't have numbers and that in a team sport you're no island. i am also giving props to those who gave the game it's building blocks. there is no kobe w/o michael. there is no michael w/o the dr, thompson, baylor, m. johnson. lebron is an accumulation of 50 years of basketball,,,,oscar was an accumulation of,,,,,5YRS???
so if everything has some sort of subjective or discretionary bias and if numbers can be twisted to your taste, what is the LEAST depedent on them. i say legacy because legacy is undeniable imo. you cannot take away what these guys gave to the game