Top 10 GOAT cases for Bird, KD, Kobe, Robinson, Malone, Garnett, Nash, Stockton?

[migya]

(alternate translation: Malone fares badly)

Here fares better than Garnett. Not to hurt feelings.

No?
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/g/garneke01.html
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/m/malonka01.html
Even using these box-score aggregates (which as has been covered, tend to skew against players with greater defensive impact):

KG's best years have a consistent advantage over Malone's

Covered here https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=2257222


Playoffs:


Garnett - 143gm, 36.9mins, 18.2pts, 48fg%, 3.3ftm, 79ft%, 10.7reb, 3.3ast, 1.2stl, 1.3blk, 2.4tos, 105OR, 99DR, 21.1PER, 52.5ts%, 7.1ows, 9.3dws, 16.4ws, .149ws/48, 5.1bpm, 9.4vorp, +2.5oncourt, +14.5on/off


Malone - 193gm, 41min, 24.7pts, 46.3fg%, 6.6ftm, 73.6ft%, 10.7reb, 3.2ast, 1.3stl, 0.7blk, 2.8tos, 106OR, 103DR, 21.1PER, 52.6ts%, 11.3ows, 11.6dws, 23.0ws, .140ws/48, 4.1bpm, 12.1vorp, +0.8oncourt, +13.6on/off


* oncourt and on/off stats are 1997 onwards and so miss most of Malone's prime.



Even if Garnett is seen as being slightly better in the playoffs Malone was considerably better in the RS and for much longer. Malone played far more playoff games after the age of 34 than Garnett did.

[OhayoKD]

Here fares better than Garnett. Not to hurt feelings.

No?
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/g/garneke01.html
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/m/malonka01.html
Even using these box-score aggregates (which as has been covered, tend to skew against players with greater defensive impact):

KG's best years have a consistent advantage over Malone's

Covered here https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=2257222


Playoffs:


Garnett - 143gm, 36.9mins, 18.2pts, 48fg%, 3.3ftm, 79ft%, 10.7reb, 3.3ast, 1.2stl, 1.3blk, 2.4tos, 105OR, 99DR, 21.1PER, 52.5ts%, 7.1ows, 9.3dws, 16.4ws, .149ws/48, 5.1bpm, 9.4vorp, +2.5oncourt, +14.5on/off


Malone - 193gm, 41min, 24.7pts, 46.3fg%, 6.6ftm, 73.6ft%, 10.7reb, 3.2ast, 1.3stl, 0.7blk, 2.8tos, 106OR, 103DR, 21.1PER, 52.6ts%, 11.3ows, 11.6dws, 23.0ws, .140ws/48, 4.1bpm, 12.1vorp, +0.8oncourt, +13.6on/off


* oncourt and on/off stats are 1997 onwards and so miss most of Malone's prime.



Even if Garnett is seen as being slightly better in the playoffs Malone was considerably better in the RS and for much longer. Malone played far more playoff games after the age of 34 than Garnett did.

kg is winning everything that isn't culmnative(played less po games) and if you isolate for best years(the vast majority of his playoff games are post-prime) the gap widens.

Malone peaked much later than KG so age isn't really meaningful here. The vast, vast majority of KG's playoff games are from 2008 or later(post-prime) while the bulk of Malone's games come from 92-98(so straight up his best years), and yet KG is winning out despite these metrics being skewed towards Malone in multiple ways.

If we look at their best years, KG's best 2 years come out ahead in BPM, and PER while 04 is clear of anything in WS and 03 is basically tied with Malone's best score.

So even using metrics which generally favor attackers(doesn't count negative defensive outcomes or the majority of positive defensive plays), KG unanmiously comes out having a better looking rs peak and is on average a better playoff performer with a better playoff peak. Malone's only statistical edge here is longevity-based accumulative stuff in the RS.

Considering champsionship prob isn't linear, I could easily see, even just going off the box-stuff, kg having more rs value, and he wins out in the playoffs and in terms of peak. Not a great look for the Mailman if I'm being honest.

[migya]

No?
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/g/garneke01.html
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/m/malonka01.html
Even using these box-score aggregates (which as has been covered, tend to skew against players with greater defensive impact):

KG's best years have a consistent advantage over Malone's

Covered here https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=2257222


Playoffs:


Garnett - 143gm, 36.9mins, 18.2pts, 48fg%, 3.3ftm, 79ft%, 10.7reb, 3.3ast, 1.2stl, 1.3blk, 2.4tos, 105OR, 99DR, 21.1PER, 52.5ts%, 7.1ows, 9.3dws, 16.4ws, .149ws/48, 5.1bpm, 9.4vorp, +2.5oncourt, +14.5on/off


Malone - 193gm, 41min, 24.7pts, 46.3fg%, 6.6ftm, 73.6ft%, 10.7reb, 3.2ast, 1.3stl, 0.7blk, 2.8tos, 106OR, 103DR, 21.1PER, 52.6ts%, 11.3ows, 11.6dws, 23.0ws, .140ws/48, 4.1bpm, 12.1vorp, +0.8oncourt, +13.6on/off


* oncourt and on/off stats are 1997 onwards and so miss most of Malone's prime.



Even if Garnett is seen as being slightly better in the playoffs Malone was considerably better in the RS and for much longer. Malone played far more playoff games after the age of 34 than Garnett did.

kg is winning everything that isn't culmnative(played less po games) and if you isolate for best years(the vast majority of his playoff games are post-prime) the gap widens.

Malone peaked much later than KG so age isn't really meaningful here. The vast, vast majority of KG's playoff games are from 2008 or later(post-prime) while the bulk of Malone's games come from 92-98(so straight up his best years), and yet KG is winning out despite these metrics being skewed towards Malone in multiple ways.

If we look at their best years, KG's best 2 years come out ahead in BPM, and PER while 04 is clear of anything in WS and 03 is basically tied with Malone's best score.

So even using metrics which generally favor attackers(doesn't count negative defensive outcomes or the majority of positive defensive plays), KG unanmiously comes out having a better looking rs peak and is on average a better playoff performer with a better playoff peak. Malone's only statistical edge here is longevity-based accumulative stuff in the RS.

Considering champsionship prob isn't linear, I could easily see, even just going off the box-stuff, kg having more rs value, and he wins out in the playoffs and in terms of peak. Not a great look for the Mailman if I'm being honest.

Malone played over a quarter of his playoff games after the age of 35, past real prime, not favoring him at all. Malone's peak isn't easy to identify, as he was great at the start of the 90sc as well. Garnett just doesn't have a very long prime, particularly compared to Malone.

Garnett's playoff peak is either 04 or 08, 08 having bit better metrics but 04 better averages. Either is not as good as Malone's 92 playoffs.


Malone 92 PS -
16gm, 43.0mins, 29.1pts, 52.1fg%, 10.6ftm, 80.5ft%, 11.3reb, 2.6ast, 1.4stl, 1.2blk, 2.9tos,
124OR, 109DR, 25.0PE4, 61.8ts%, 2.3ows, 0.9dws, 3.2ws, .220ws/48, 6.5bpm, 1.5vorp


Garnett 04 PS - 18gm, 43.5mins, 24.3pts, 45.2fg%, 5.4ftm, 77.6ft%, 14.6reb, 5.1ast, 1.3stl, 2.3blk, 4.2tos,
100OR, 95DR, 25.0PER, 51.3ts%, 1.4ows, 1.3dws, 2.7ws, .163ws/48, 6.5bpm, 1.7vorp

08 PS - 26gm, 38.0mins, 20.4pts, 49.5fg%, 3.6ftm, 81.0ft%, 10.5reb, 3.3ast, 1.3stl, 1.1blk, 2.1tos,
112OR, 99, 23.0PER, 54.2ts%, 2.1ows, 2.0dws, 4.1ws, .199ws/48, 6.6bpm, 2.1vorp


Malone's peak is considerably better than Garnett's in the playoffs.

Using Malone's 98 is still higher - 20gm, 26.3pts, 39.8mins, 47.1fg%, 6.5ftm, 78.8ft%, 10.9reb, 3.4ast, 1.1stl, 1.0blk, 3.0tos,
105OR, 96DR, 24.2PER, 53.4ts%, 1.3ows, 1.7dws, 3.0ws, .184ws/48, 7.1bpm, 1.8vorp

[OhayoKD]

Covered here https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=2257222


Playoffs:


Garnett - 143gm, 36.9mins, 18.2pts, 48fg%, 3.3ftm, 79ft%, 10.7reb, 3.3ast, 1.2stl, 1.3blk, 2.4tos, 105OR, 99DR, 21.1PER, 52.5ts%, 7.1ows, 9.3dws, 16.4ws, .149ws/48, 5.1bpm, 9.4vorp, +2.5oncourt, +14.5on/off


Malone - 193gm, 41min, 24.7pts, 46.3fg%, 6.6ftm, 73.6ft%, 10.7reb, 3.2ast, 1.3stl, 0.7blk, 2.8tos, 106OR, 103DR, 21.1PER, 52.6ts%, 11.3ows, 11.6dws, 23.0ws, .140ws/48, 4.1bpm, 12.1vorp, +0.8oncourt, +13.6on/off


* oncourt and on/off stats are 1997 onwards and so miss most of Malone's prime.



Even if Garnett is seen as being slightly better in the playoffs Malone was considerably better in the RS and for much longer. Malone played far more playoff games after the age of 34 than Garnett did.

kg is winning everything that isn't culmnative(played less po games) and if you isolate for best years(the vast majority of his playoff games are post-prime) the gap widens.

Malone peaked much later than KG so age isn't really meaningful here. The vast, vast majority of KG's playoff games are from 2008 or later(post-prime) while the bulk of Malone's games come from 92-98(so straight up his best years), and yet KG is winning out despite these metrics being skewed towards Malone in multiple ways.

If we look at their best years, KG's best 2 years come out ahead in BPM, and PER while 04 is clear of anything in WS and 03 is basically tied with Malone's best score.

So even using metrics which generally favor attackers(doesn't count negative defensive outcomes or the majority of positive defensive plays), KG unanmiously comes out having a better looking rs peak and is on average a better playoff performer with a better playoff peak. Malone's only statistical edge here is longevity-based accumulative stuff in the RS.

Considering champsionship prob isn't linear, I could easily see, even just going off the box-stuff, kg having more rs value, and he wins out in the playoffs and in terms of peak. Not a great look for the Mailman if I'm being honest.

Malone played over a quarter of his playoff games after the age of 35, past real prime, not favoring him at all. Malone's peak isn't easy to identify, as he was great at the start of the 90sc as well. Garnett just doesn't have a very long prime, particularly compared to Malone.

Garnett's playoff peak is either 04 or 08, 08 having bit better metrics but 04 better averages. Either is not as good as Malone's 92 playoffs.


Malone 92 PS -
16gm, 43.0mins, 29.1pts, 52.1fg%, 10.6ftm, 80.5ft%, 11.3reb, 2.6ast, 1.4stl, 1.2blk, 2.9tos,
124OR, 109DR, 25.0PE4, 61.8ts%, 2.3ows, 0.9dws, 3.2ws, .220ws/48, 6.5bpm, 1.5vorp


Garnett 04 PS - 18gm, 43.5mins, 24.3pts, 45.2fg%, 5.4ftm, 77.6ft%, 14.6reb, 5.1ast, 1.3stl, 2.3blk, 4.2tos,
100OR, 95DR, 25.0PER, 51.3ts%, 1.4ows, 1.3dws, 2.7ws, .163ws/48, 6.5bpm, 1.7vorp

08 PS - 26gm, 38.0mins, 20.4pts, 49.5fg%, 3.6ftm, 81.0ft%, 10.5reb, 3.3ast, 1.3stl, 1.1blk, 2.1tos,
112OR, 99, 23.0PER, 54.2ts%, 2.1ows, 2.0dws, 4.1ws, .199ws/48, 6.6bpm, 2.1vorp


Malone's peak is considerably better than Garnett's in the playoffs.

Using Malone's 98 is still higher - 20gm, 26.3pts, 39.8mins, 47.1fg%, 6.5ftm, 78.8ft%, 10.9reb, 3.4ast, 1.1stl, 1.0blk, 3.0tos,
105OR, 96DR, 24.2PER, 53.4ts%, 1.3ows, 1.7dws, 3.0ws, .184ws/48, 7.1bpm, 1.8vorp

Neither 04 or 08 are KG's best scoring years in your metrics. Of course that might speak to the weakness in this type of analysis, but regardless, if you actually want to use these stats, the best scoring postseasons in the given metrics are 99-03. As it is, the two chosen "off-years"(by the stats you really like for some reason) are comparable enough, and of course the overall averages actually favor KG despite the playoff sample mostly being post-prime KG vs Prime Malone.

Karl Malone won his mvp's at the age of 33 and 35, KG won his at 28 and had came closest to his 2nd in 27. The reality is that expansion led to relatively older players dominating the league in the mid-90's. Age isn't a useful proxy. KG played more than twice as many games post 2004 while his value-signals and advanced stats(including the ones you've chosen) put his prime from 99-04. It's a skewed comp and Malone still looks worse using offense-favoring metrics

[migya]

kg is winning everything that isn't culmnative(played less po games) and if you isolate for best years(the vast majority of his playoff games are post-prime) the gap widens.

Malone peaked much later than KG so age isn't really meaningful here. The vast, vast majority of KG's playoff games are from 2008 or later(post-prime) while the bulk of Malone's games come from 92-98(so straight up his best years), and yet KG is winning out despite these metrics being skewed towards Malone in multiple ways.

If we look at their best years, KG's best 2 years come out ahead in BPM, and PER while 04 is clear of anything in WS and 03 is basically tied with Malone's best score.

So even using metrics which generally favor attackers(doesn't count negative defensive outcomes or the majority of positive defensive plays), KG unanmiously comes out having a better looking rs peak and is on average a better playoff performer with a better playoff peak. Malone's only statistical edge here is longevity-based accumulative stuff in the RS.

Considering champsionship prob isn't linear, I could easily see, even just going off the box-stuff, kg having more rs value, and he wins out in the playoffs and in terms of peak. Not a great look for the Mailman if I'm being honest.

Malone played over a quarter of his playoff games after the age of 35, past real prime, not favoring him at all. Malone's peak isn't easy to identify, as he was great at the start of the 90sc as well. Garnett just doesn't have a very long prime, particularly compared to Malone.

Garnett's playoff peak is either 04 or 08, 08 having bit better metrics but 04 better averages. Either is not as good as Malone's 92 playoffs.


Malone 92 PS -
16gm, 43.0mins, 29.1pts, 52.1fg%, 10.6ftm, 80.5ft%, 11.3reb, 2.6ast, 1.4stl, 1.2blk, 2.9tos,
124OR, 109DR, 25.0PE4, 61.8ts%, 2.3ows, 0.9dws, 3.2ws, .220ws/48, 6.5bpm, 1.5vorp


Garnett 04 PS - 18gm, 43.5mins, 24.3pts, 45.2fg%, 5.4ftm, 77.6ft%, 14.6reb, 5.1ast, 1.3stl, 2.3blk, 4.2tos,
100OR, 95DR, 25.0PER, 51.3ts%, 1.4ows, 1.3dws, 2.7ws, .163ws/48, 6.5bpm, 1.7vorp

08 PS - 26gm, 38.0mins, 20.4pts, 49.5fg%, 3.6ftm, 81.0ft%, 10.5reb, 3.3ast, 1.3stl, 1.1blk, 2.1tos,
112OR, 99, 23.0PER, 54.2ts%, 2.1ows, 2.0dws, 4.1ws, .199ws/48, 6.6bpm, 2.1vorp


Malone's peak is considerably better than Garnett's in the playoffs.

Using Malone's 98 is still higher - 20gm, 26.3pts, 39.8mins, 47.1fg%, 6.5ftm, 78.8ft%, 10.9reb, 3.4ast, 1.1stl, 1.0blk, 3.0tos,
105OR, 96DR, 24.2PER, 53.4ts%, 1.3ows, 1.7dws, 3.0ws, .184ws/48, 7.1bpm, 1.8vorp

Neither 04 or 08 are KG's best scoring years in your metrics. Of course that might speak to the weakness in this type of analysis, but regardless, if you actually want to use these stats, the best scoring postseasons in the given metrics are 99-03. As it is, the two chosen "off-years"(by the stats you really like for some reason) are comparable enough, and off course the averages actually favor KG despite the playoff sample mostly being post-prime KG vs Prime Malone.

Don't get what you mean by nether 04 or 08 aren't the best for metrics and 99-03 are? Garnett was out in the first round every year until 04 and his metrics are at their best in either 04 or 08.

[dygaction]

kg is winning everything that isn't culmnative(played less po games) and if you isolate for best years(the vast majority of his playoff games are post-prime) the gap widens.

Malone peaked much later than KG so age isn't really meaningful here. The vast, vast majority of KG's playoff games are from 2008 or later(post-prime) while the bulk of Malone's games come from 92-98(so straight up his best years), and yet KG is winning out despite these metrics being skewed towards Malone in multiple ways.

If we look at their best years, KG's best 2 years come out ahead in BPM, and PER while 04 is clear of anything in WS and 03 is basically tied with Malone's best score.

So even using metrics which generally favor attackers(doesn't count negative defensive outcomes or the majority of positive defensive plays), KG unanmiously comes out having a better looking rs peak and is on average a better playoff performer with a better playoff peak. Malone's only statistical edge here is longevity-based accumulative stuff in the RS.

Considering champsionship prob isn't linear, I could easily see, even just going off the box-stuff, kg having more rs value, and he wins out in the playoffs and in terms of peak. Not a great look for the Mailman if I'm being honest.

Malone played over a quarter of his playoff games after the age of 35, past real prime, not favoring him at all. Malone's peak isn't easy to identify, as he was great at the start of the 90sc as well. Garnett just doesn't have a very long prime, particularly compared to Malone.

Garnett's playoff peak is either 04 or 08, 08 having bit better metrics but 04 better averages. Either is not as good as Malone's 92 playoffs.


Malone 92 PS -
16gm, 43.0mins, 29.1pts, 52.1fg%, 10.6ftm, 80.5ft%, 11.3reb, 2.6ast, 1.4stl, 1.2blk, 2.9tos,
124OR, 109DR, 25.0PE4, 61.8ts%, 2.3ows, 0.9dws, 3.2ws, .220ws/48, 6.5bpm, 1.5vorp


Garnett 04 PS - 18gm, 43.5mins, 24.3pts, 45.2fg%, 5.4ftm, 77.6ft%, 14.6reb, 5.1ast, 1.3stl, 2.3blk, 4.2tos,
100OR, 95DR, 25.0PER, 51.3ts%, 1.4ows, 1.3dws, 2.7ws, .163ws/48, 6.5bpm, 1.7vorp

08 PS - 26gm, 38.0mins, 20.4pts, 49.5fg%, 3.6ftm, 81.0ft%, 10.5reb, 3.3ast, 1.3stl, 1.1blk, 2.1tos,
112OR, 99, 23.0PER, 54.2ts%, 2.1ows, 2.0dws, 4.1ws, .199ws/48, 6.6bpm, 2.1vorp


Malone's peak is considerably better than Garnett's in the playoffs.

Using Malone's 98 is still higher - 20gm, 26.3pts, 39.8mins, 47.1fg%, 6.5ftm, 78.8ft%, 10.9reb, 3.4ast, 1.1stl, 1.0blk, 3.0tos,
105OR, 96DR, 24.2PER, 53.4ts%, 1.3ows, 1.7dws, 3.0ws, .184ws/48, 7.1bpm, 1.8vorp

Neither 04 or 08 are KG's best scoring years in your metrics. Of course that might speak to the weakness in this type of analysis, but regardless, if you actually want to use these stats, the best scoring postseasons in the given metrics are 99-03. As it is, the two chosen "off-years"(by the stats you really like for some reason) are comparable enough, and of course the overall averages actually favor KG despite the playoff sample mostly being post-prime KG vs Prime Malone.

Karl Malone won his mvp's at the age of 33 and 35, KG won his at 28 and had came closest to his 2nd in 27. The reality is that expansion led to relatively older players dominating the league in the mid-90's. Age isn't a useful proxy. KG played more than twice as many games post 2004 while his value-signals and advanced stats(including the ones you've chosen) put his prime from 99-04. It's a skewed comp and Malone still looks worse using offense-favoring metrics

Don't think there is a need to compare their scoring at all, not the same level. Malone had 13 seasons finished top 5 in ppg, 5 of them @ #2 with #1 being MJ. Think about this, he could have five scoring titles if not because of Jordan.
Garnett finished #3 once, #9 once, and #10 once.

Their scoring difference is similar to Harden and Gary Payton. Payton did finish top 10 three times at #6, #7, and #10.

[ceoofkobefans]

Here fares better than Garnett. Not to hurt feelings.

No?
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/g/garneke01.html
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/m/malonka01.html
Even using these box-score aggregates (which as has been covered, tend to skew against players with greater defensive impact):

KG's best years have a consistent advantage over Malone's

Covered here https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=2257222


Playoffs:


Garnett - 143gm, 36.9mins, 18.2pts, 48fg%, 3.3ftm, 79ft%, 10.7reb, 3.3ast, 1.2stl, 1.3blk, 2.4tos, 105OR, 99DR, 21.1PER, 52.5ts%, 7.1ows, 9.3dws, 16.4ws, .149ws/48, 5.1bpm, 9.4vorp, +2.5oncourt, +14.5on/off


Malone - 193gm, 41min, 24.7pts, 46.3fg%, 6.6ftm, 73.6ft%, 10.7reb, 3.2ast, 1.3stl, 0.7blk, 2.8tos, 106OR, 103DR, 21.1PER, 52.6ts%, 11.3ows, 11.6dws, 23.0ws, .140ws/48, 4.1bpm, 12.1vorp, +0.8oncourt, +13.6on/off


* oncourt and on/off stats are 1997 onwards and so miss most of Malone's prime.



Even if Garnett is seen as being slightly better in the playoffs Malone was considerably better in the RS and for much longer. Malone played far more playoff games after the age of 34 than Garnett did.

Averages tend to go down the longer the sample is and Malone arguably peaked in 97 and 98

Also can i ask why

1. You’re using careers instead of peaks or primed

2. Why you’re using per game instead of per 75

3. Why you aren’t adjusting for era or opponents (era for RS opponents for PO)