Top 10 best basketball players ever

[Doctor MJ]

The greatest players ever are also the best, it's not that complicated.

Not what those words mean, no. Many people like to pretend they are substitutes for one another, but the meanings are distinct.

Is this some sort of Yank custom, where every term has to be broken down, analysed, categorised to an absurd degree? Does anyone here think that real NBA players would make these distinctions, or perhaps only RealGM members? If we are lay-etymologists, however, then 'great' has several different meanings - no singular 'distinct' one - some of which may indeed overlap with 'good', which is the base of 'best'.

Well i would say the roots of that culture come out of 18th century France, after losing some important heads to the guillotine, it then helps accelerate the Industrial Revolution in England in the 19th century, but yes, I’d say England passes the torch to the US in the 20th century and you can arguably see it generally in sport where American team sports have sophisticated box scores while European soccer folks somehow didn’t think to even record assists consistently.

Of course in the 21st century the data revolution has spread everywhere now and some of the folks involved here on the board have no connection to the US.

Re: real NBA players. Have no authority here any more than they do in discussions about the shape of the earth.

In general the tendency to conflate criteria causes much of confusion when having discussions, so if you’re having a serious debate you want to make sure you’re not talking past each other.

Re: different meanings of great. Very true, which is why I entered into the thread looking to point out distinctions between various valid criteria.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[OhayoKD]

Not what those words mean, no. Many people like to pretend they are substitutes for one another, but the meanings are distinct.

Is this some sort of Yank custom, where every term has to be broken down, analysed, categorised to an absurd degree? Does anyone here think that real NBA players would make these distinctions, or perhaps only RealGM members? If we are lay-etymologists, however, then 'great' has several different meanings - no singular 'distinct' one - some of which may indeed overlap with 'good', which is the base of 'best'.

Well i would say the roots of that culture come out of 18th century France, after losing some important heads to the guillotine, it then helps accelerate the Industrial Revolution in England in the 19th century, but yes, I’d say England passes the torch to the US in the 20th century and you can arguably see it generally in sport where American team sports have sophisticated box scores while European soccer folks somehow didn’t think to even record assists consistently.

Of course in the 21st century the data revolution has spread everywhere now and some of the folks involved here on the board have no connection to the US.

Re: real NBA players. Have no authority here any more than they do in discussions about the shape of the earth.

In general the tendency to conflate criteria causes much of confusion when having discussions, so if you’re having a serious debate you want to make sure you’re not talking past each other.

Re: different meanings of great. Very true, which is why I entered into the thread looking to point out distinctions between various valid criteria.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Or the realness of the moon...

[KembaWalker]

I think in a vacuum LeBron is better than Mike at basketball. Which has nothing to do with the GOAT conversation. Jokic might be better than LeBron at basketball, I dunno. In 20 years, someone will be better than both of them. Probably a few guys. Skill and knowledge only goes up

[NbaAllDay]

I think in a vacuum LeBron is better than Mike at basketball. Which has nothing to do with the GOAT conversation. Jokic might be better than LeBron at basketball, I dunno. In 20 years, someone will be better than both of them. Probably a few guys. Skill and knowledge only goes up

Do we then overcomplicate it when it comes to being the GOAT? The discussion often turns into narratives and hyperbole.

I get there is more to it than just 'in a vacuum' however it becomes so convoluted that often the simplest starting points (that you expand on) usually lead to the most accurate outcomes.

I guess when most start a discussion already convinced on their own outcome, that won't happen.

[KembaWalker]

I think in a vacuum LeBron is better than Mike at basketball. Which has nothing to do with the GOAT conversation. Jokic might be better than LeBron at basketball, I dunno. In 20 years, someone will be better than both of them. Probably a few guys. Skill and knowledge only goes up

Do we then overcomplicate it when it comes to being the GOAT? The discussion often turns into narratives and hyperbole.

I get there is more to it than just 'in a vacuum' however it becomes so convoluted that often the simplest starting points (that you expand on) usually lead to the most accurate outcomes.

I guess when most start a discussion already convinced on their own outcome, that won't happen.

you wont find greatness measured by a spreadsheet

theres a reason LeBron and JJ didn't bring up WOWY and VORP on their podcast

but you can maybe measure who does some things the best

[NbaAllDay]

I think in a vacuum LeBron is better than Mike at basketball. Which has nothing to do with the GOAT conversation. Jokic might be better than LeBron at basketball, I dunno. In 20 years, someone will be better than both of them. Probably a few guys. Skill and knowledge only goes up

Do we then overcomplicate it when it comes to being the GOAT? The discussion often turns into narratives and hyperbole.

I get there is more to it than just 'in a vacuum' however it becomes so convoluted that often the simplest starting points (that you expand on) usually lead to the most accurate outcomes.

I guess when most start a discussion already convinced on their own outcome, that won't happen.

you wont find greatness measured by a spreadsheet

theres a reason LeBron and JJ didn't bring up WOWY and VORP on their podcast

but you can maybe measure who does some things the best

People say this, and it's true, however I have never seen any serious basketball thinker claim that's how you measure it.

I assume you are referring to the people who are heavy on data. It speaks to what I said though, we drive a narrative or conversely, we pigeon whole someone's argument with e.g "you wont find greatness measured on a spreadsheet" when someone provides data as evidence, as if to completely dismiss anything of value in what was provided. (Not saying that's what you do, simply the most common thing I see)

Anyhow, probably not the area for it, I just find most of the talk outside of the some of the projects on greatest players as mostly narrative driven messes.