RealGM Greatest Peaks Project---List, Interest, Metathinking thread

[PaulieWal]

Btw, as someone else said yesterday, you and Quotatious having the same avatar is kinda confusing. No big deal, just something to think about.

Paulie wanted to see how many people will fall for that trap, lol.

Why would you reveal that?

[trex_8063]

Also, are we doing ballots?

Yes. See point "d" of OP: choose a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd-ballot choice (which will be "scored" as worth 3, 2, and 1 pts respectively).

Hey trex_8063,

I hate to do this but I'm going to have to bow out of being an official voter. After several discussions today, I've confirmed that I'll be way too busy to keep up with this project, let alone be able to give informed, critical opinions.

I'll check in and give my thoughts when I can but I don't think it would be smart of me nor fair to others if I even tried to participate. These next few months are going to be pretty brutal for me work wise.

I hope everything works out! I'll definitely be around when I can sneak a few minutes on the board.

I appreciate the heads up, but I'm going to keep you in the voter pool. Participate when you can.

An option would be to set 30 as the first goal, and after the top 30 one targets 50 as the next if there are enough - however defined - voters of the pool left who haven't lost interest/time capacities.

Agree. Let's get to 30 and then see where we're at as far as participation and enthusiasm. I for one think it would be interesting to get out to 40 or 50, though.

We could also ponder on extending the voter pool. I've seen some posters, iirc, who mentioned that they won't participate because they don't have much time to be active in such a project (I will go on research this month myself and don't know about internet-access and time left yet). But I would simply allow 'quality-users' to vote whenever they can regardless of their activity-level. One other option would be to contact the knowledgeable and reasonable posters of the team-boards - although I don't know how many guys there are when it comes to historical players who aren't active on the PC board already. And even on this board there are some usually active and good posters left who neither confirmed their participation nor declared their non-participation - are we sure they know about the project?

Expansion of the voter pool can continue while the project is in process. And known quality posters will be allowed in immediately should they decide they want to participate. The official voter pool list (and cautions against unknowns) is mostly to protect against trolls and agenda-mongers from jumping in out of nowhere.

btw, I like your idea of data sharing, though time commitment to doing so is a bit of an issue.. I have extensive per 100 possession estimates for many pre-1974 players (along with relative TS%), as well as some with/without data for many players from pre-impact data eras. I'd been sharing a touch of that with eminence via PM (at his request). I can share some of that with everyone, if there's interest.

Do we have a start date for the project?

I intend to start the project on Sunday (unsure if in morning or evening, since we're talking about approximately 36 hrs per thread). Everyone be on the watch for the thread on Sunday.

btw---as it seems to be the consensus of opinion, we'll go with shot-clock era only (ABA can be included). And although I'd not officially restricted the project to encompass only North American pro basketball leagues, I'd at least suggest restricting opinions to that, just because of the general lack of data and knowledge regarding foreign leagues. As a result I think casting a ballot somewhere for a young Arvydas Sabonis, for instance, is essentially wasting a ballot......I doubt he's going to garner enough support due to all the mystery and lack of information and informed opinion.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

[The-Power]

btw, I like your idea of data sharing, though time commitment to doing so is a bit of an issue.. I have extensive per 100 possession estimates for many pre-1974 players (along with relative TS%), as well as some with/without data for many players from pre-impact data eras. I'd been sharing a touch of that with eminence via PM (at his request). I can share some of that with everyone, if there's interest.

Sure, I for one am interested. I'm currently creating a list with basic stats gathered for all players I consider for the project to get a neat overview and this includes per 100 data for those available. If you wouldn't mind sharing it I'll gladly use it for the players concerned and it also shouldn't be harmful to other users. On top of that it can be used as a point of reference in further discussion.

By the way, I started editing my post and added some links. I would add your input after you posted it and (since my post is already on the previous page) I'll say again that I encourage everyone to share links or data and help others to gain useful information. Just post it here or send me a PM and I'll edit the overview. Every input is appreciated.

[trex_8063]

btw, I like your idea of data sharing, though time commitment to doing so is a bit of an issue.. I have extensive per 100 possession estimates for many pre-1974 players (along with relative TS%), as well as some with/without data for many players from pre-impact data eras. I'd been sharing a touch of that with eminence via PM (at his request). I can share some of that with everyone, if there's interest.

Sure, I for one am interested. I'm currently creating a list with basic stats gathered for all players I consider for the project to get a neat overview and this includes per 100 data for those available. If you wouldn't mind sharing it I'll gladly use it for the players concerned and it also shouldn't be harmful to other users. On top of that it can be used as a point of reference in further discussion.

By the way, I started editing my post and added some links. I would add your input after you posted it and (since my post is already on the previous page) I'll say again that I encourage everyone to share links or data and help others to gain useful information. Just post it here or send me a PM and I'll edit the overview. Every input is appreciated.

Here is a link to my spreadsheet of Per 100 poss stats and rTS%, which I think should provide view-only access to anyone interested (players listed alphabetical by last name):

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1xTcce_cLHEmvG6Dft5QwsYnhzh_dBk4gyYXoJiWY4T8/edit?usp=sharing

[eminence]

Spoiler:

Also, are we doing ballots?

Yes. See point "d" of OP: choose a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd-ballot choice (which will be "scored" as worth 3, 2, and 1 pts respectively).

Hey trex_8063,

I hate to do this but I'm going to have to bow out of being an official voter. After several discussions today, I've confirmed that I'll be way too busy to keep up with this project, let alone be able to give informed, critical opinions.

I'll check in and give my thoughts when I can but I don't think it would be smart of me nor fair to others if I even tried to participate. These next few months are going to be pretty brutal for me work wise.

I hope everything works out! I'll definitely be around when I can sneak a few minutes on the board.

I appreciate the heads up, but I'm going to keep you in the voter pool. Participate when you can.

An option would be to set 30 as the first goal, and after the top 30 one targets 50 as the next if there are enough - however defined - voters of the pool left who haven't lost interest/time capacities.

Agree. Let's get to 30 and then see where we're at as far as participation and enthusiasm. I for one think it would be interesting to get out to 40 or 50, though.

We could also ponder on extending the voter pool. I've seen some posters, iirc, who mentioned that they won't participate because they don't have much time to be active in such a project (I will go on research this month myself and don't know about internet-access and time left yet). But I would simply allow 'quality-users' to vote whenever they can regardless of their activity-level. One other option would be to contact the knowledgeable and reasonable posters of the team-boards - although I don't know how many guys there are when it comes to historical players who aren't active on the PC board already. And even on this board there are some usually active and good posters left who neither confirmed their participation nor declared their non-participation - are we sure they know about the project?

Expansion of the voter pool can continue while the project is in process. And known quality posters will be allowed in immediately should they decide they want to participate. The official voter pool list (and cautions against unknowns) is mostly to protect against trolls and agenda-mongers from jumping in out of nowhere.

btw, I like your idea of data sharing, though time commitment to doing so is a bit of an issue.. I have extensive per 100 possession estimates for many pre-1974 players (along with relative TS%), as well as some with/without data for many players from pre-impact data eras. I'd been sharing a touch of that with eminence via PM (at his request). I can share some of that with everyone, if there's interest.

Do we have a start date for the project?

I intend to start the project on Sunday (unsure if in morning or evening, since we're talking about approximately 36 hrs per thread). Everyone be on the watch for the thread on Sunday.

btw---as it seems to be the consensus of opinion, we'll go with shot-clock era only (ABA can be included). And although I'd not officially restricted the project to encompass only North American pro basketball leagues, I'd at least suggest restricting opinions to that, just because of the general lack of data and knowledge regarding foreign leagues. As a result I think casting a ballot somewhere for a young Arvydas Sabonis, for instance, is essentially wasting a ballot......I doubt he's going to garner enough support due to all the mystery and lack of information and informed opinion.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Excited to get started, should be fun. Have my list tiered and really ready to start diving into separating out the close ones.

[mischievous]

I'd like to participate.

[trex_8063]

I'd like to participate.

Done.
If you haven't already done so, please read thoroughly thru the OP, as well as post #82 (at the very least) to get the gist of how this will work.

[mischievous]

I'd like to participate.

Done.
If you haven't already done so, please read thoroughly thru the OP, as well as post #82 (at the very least) to get the gist of how this will work.

Already did. But to get clarity, when a spot is won by a player there won't be a year attached to them because of the disagreements on the year correct?

[trex_8063]

I'd like to participate.

Done.
If you haven't already done so, please read thoroughly thru the OP, as well as post #82 (at the very least) to get the gist of how this will work.

Already did. But to get clarity, when a spot is won by a player there won't be a year attached to them because of the disagreements on the year correct?

Correct. A player is going to get credit for all ballots cast for him in a voting round, regardless of the year specified. However, since I would like to recognize which year people attach the most value to, we will generally be having a side-thread to determine consensus on his peak year after he's been voted in (that is: a thread that is running alongside the peaks project at the same time, so that we don't have to delay moving on to the next place/rank in the peaks project while determining the year).

Which reminds me, I meant to put this forth in post #82: I propose that if there is 75+% consensus on a player's peak within the primary thread in which he gets voted in, that we NOT bother with a side-thread. If, otoh, we have less <75% consensus, I'll conduct a side-thread in which people can make their case for one year over another and officially cast their opinion/vote on which year is his best.

Example: suppose when Magic Johnson gets voted in, there are 15 ballots cast for him--->13 are for '87, and two are for '89.....even though it's not unanimous, I propose we simply declare '87 the consensus peak year WITHOUT conducting a side thread (i.e. save the side-threads for when it's actually somewhat close).

Reasonable?

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

[mischievous]

Done.
If you haven't already done so, please read thoroughly thru the OP, as well as post #82 (at the very least) to get the gist of how this will work.

Already did. But to get clarity, when a spot is won by a player there won't be a year attached to them because of the disagreements on the year correct?

Correct. A player is going to get credit for all ballots cast for him in a voting round, regardless of the year specified. However, since I would like to recognize which year people attach the most value to, we will generally be having a side-thread to determine consensus on his peak year after he's been voted in (that is: a thread that is running alongside the peaks project at the same time, so that we don't have to delay moving on to the next place/rank in the peaks project while determining the year).

Which reminds me, I meant to put this forth in post #82: I propose that if there is 75+% consensus on a player's peak within the primary thread in which he gets voted in, that we NOT bother with a side-thread. If, otoh, we have less <75% consensus, I'll conduct a side-thread in which people can make their case for one year over another and official cast their opinion/vote on which year is his best.
Reasonable?

Thanks, and yeah seems fair enough.

I may create a quick top 20 or so peak list and post it if i have time. I'm surprised no one has posted any.

[LA Bird]

I would be interested in participating in the later stages of the project if that's ok. I don't think I will have the time to do enough research to actively participate in the project in the next few days.

[trex_8063]

I would be interested in participating in the later stages of the project if that's ok. I don't think I will have the time to do enough research to actively participate in the project in the next few days.

I'll tentatively add you to the voter pool.
If you've not already done so, please thoroughly read the OP, post #82, and post #89 (and whatever else itt you wish).

[RSCD3_]

I would be interested in participating in the later stages of the project if that's ok. I don't think I will have the time to do enough research to actively participate in the project in the next few days.

I'll tentatively add you to the voter pool.
If you've not already done so, please thoroughly read the OP, post #82, and post #89 (and whatever else itt you wish).

Great idea with the continuous side thread a lot better than multiple threads


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[trex_8063]

I would be interested in participating in the later stages of the project if that's ok. I don't think I will have the time to do enough research to actively participate in the project in the next few days.

I'll tentatively add you to the voter pool.
If you've not already done so, please thoroughly read the OP, post #82, and post #89 (and whatever else itt you wish).

Great idea with the continuous side thread a lot better than multiple threads


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Actually, I was thinking multiple threads, but a single one stickied up front where we can have all these side-votes is perhaps a good idea. Thanks!

[Moonbeam]

Sounds great, trex! I agree with the 75% criterion.

As far as data sharing is concerned, I'd be happy to put the data set I sent you in some sort of shared document. If it is too big, Dropbox access could be sorted.

[yoyoboy]

I'm in.

[ceiling raiser]

Very cool project idea. Not sure if I'll have time to participate, but looking forward to reading the conversation either way.

Just wondering...I wasn't following the previous peaks project, wondering what issues there are to learn from last time? You mentioned in the OP that there was some dispute over which year to name as a player's peak. Are there any other concerns?

You know what, if you still need an extra voter, I'll throw my name in if it's not too late. I don't have a current peaks list, but I'd like to challenge myself to vote and research. At the very least I'll learn more, and I'll share whatever useful information I can find.

Right now I'm struggling with rating guys for whom I haven't seen a ton of tape, so I may decline to vote if it comes down to an old school guy vs a more recent player. Also, I presently believe that Boston/LA (and Philly with Dr. J and Moses) were stacked a ton, more so than any other team since then. This might not be 100% accurate, but it's my current position.

[trex_8063]

I'm in.

You know what, if you still need an extra voter, I'll throw my name in it's not too late. I don't have a current peaks list, but I'd like to challenge myself to vote and research. At the very least I'll learn more, and I'll share whatever useful information I can find.

Glad to have you both.
I'm going to try and have the first voting thread open by tomorrow morning.

[thizznation]

Let the voting begin!

[GoldenFrieza21]

I would like to participate. I know my post count is an issue. But if I posted in the first few and made good contributions could I be added to the list?