RealGM

Hey RealGM'ers, was thinking of starting up a Peaks Project (top 50??) this fall, maybe beginning in early September.

Am posting this thread (penbeast0 is going to sticky it for us) to get an idea if there is adequate interest. I figure we should allow for a voter pool of at least 15-20 people, especially noting how turnout drops off once you get past the top 10-20 places; if there isn't at least that much interest, then it's probably a no go.

Similar to the top 100 project, voters must register here to participate (just state your interest in participating within this thread). Regular/known posters will be allowed in immediately. Though I don't intend to set a minimum post-count requirement, newer (and thus relatively unknown) posters will have to show a willingness (and ability) to contribute meaningful discourse before being officially entered into the voting pool (there's time to prove this willingness and ability before the voting actually starts, since we likely won't get underway for at least a couple weeks).

Here are my thoughts/intentions on other rules and format (open to comments/changes):

a) Top 50 sound in-depth enough to everyone?
b) Reasoning/statistical support, etc required for votes to be counted. A simple list of names will not be counted.
c) As with the top 100 project, I was planning an approximately 48-hour window for voting for each place.
d) Instead of the format we used in the top 100 project (where everybody voted for ONE candidate, and if no consensus was reached we had a 24-hour run-off between the top two vote recipients), I was thinking more like this:
Everyone gives their 1st-ballot choice, 2nd-ballot choice, and 3rd-ballot choice. I'll award 3 pts for a 1st ballot, 2 for a 2nd ballot, and 1 for a 3rd. Highest point-total wins the spot (24-hour run-off will then only be done in the unlikely event of a tie). In this way I'm hoping to cut down the length of time this project will run, as I think that was part of the issue with poor voter turn-out in the late stages of the top 100 project. This format should probably keep each place down to ~48 hours.
e) I noticed on the last project a specified year for each player peak was stated. As there can be disagreement on which year is the peak for certain players (e.g. Lebron--->many think it's '09, many think it's '13 or '12), I propose that player gets credit for all votes he receives in a round, regardless of the year designated. For instance, if in a given round '09 Lebron received 17 pts, and '13 Lebron received 16 pts, and '12 Lebron received 12 pts.....we'll just count that as 45 pts for Lebron. Otherwise it's as though we're penalizing a player for having a longer sustained peak. Anyone disagree?
***I still think it would be worthwhile to designate a year you think is a player's peak, as I'll likely include this info in the list. Just wrt scoring each round, we'll add all vote-receiving years up. Then as we move on, we'll conduct a side thread to debate and vote for the consensus year which represents a player's peak in all instances where there is NOT at least 75% consensus for a specific year.


Please post any thoughts/suggestions, as well as any intent to participate within this thread.

VOTER POOL
trex_8063
Quotatious
70sFan
RSCD_3
Mutnt

SKF_85
Clyde Frazier
eminence
NyCeEvO
Dr. Positivity

SideshowBob
Gregoire
Moonbeam
JordansBulls
PaulieWal

theonlyclutch
The-Power
thizznation
mischievous
LA Bird

yoyoboy
fpliii
MyUniBroDavis
Narigo
PCProductions

Joao Saraiva
BallerHogger
GoldenFrieza21
drza
urnoggin

Dr Spaceman
RebelWithoutACause
E-Balla

RealGM Greatest Player Peaks of All-Time List
1. Michael Jordan ('91---unanimous)
2. Shaquille O'Neal ('00---unanimous)
3. Lebron James ('13---non-unanimous ('09, '12))
4. Wilt Chamberlain ('67---non-unanimous ('64))
5. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar ('77---non-unanimous ('71, '72))
6. Hakeem Olajuwon ('94---non-unanimous ('93))
7. Tim Duncan ('03---non-unanimous ('02))
8. Kevin Garnett ('04---unanimous)
9. Bill Russell ('65---non-unanimous ('62, '64))
10. Magic Johnson ('87---unanimous)
11. Larry Bird ('86---non-unanimous ('87, '88))
12. David Robinson ('95---non-unanimous ('94, '96))
13. Bill Walton ('77---unanimous)
14. Julius Erving ('76---unanimous)
15. Oscar Robertson ('64---non-unanimous ('63))
16. Dwyane Wade ('09---non-unanimous ('06, '10))
17. Stephen Curry ('15---unanimous)
18. Dirk Nowitzki ('11---non-unanimous ('06, '09))
19. Jerry West ('66---non-unanimous ('68, '69))
20. Kevin Durant ('14---unanimous)
21. Patrick Ewing ('90---unanimous)
22. Tracy McGrady ('03---unanimous)
23. Kobe Bryant ('08---non-unanimous ('06, '09))
24. Charles Barkley ('90---non-unanimous ('93))
25. Moses Malone ('83---unanimous)
26. Chris Paul ('08---non-unanimous ('15))
27. Karl Malone ('97---non-unanimous ('92/'95/'98))
28. Steve Nash ('07---non-unanimous ('05))
29. Anthony Davis ('15---unanimous)
30. Dwight Howard ('11---non-unanimous ('09))
31. Alonzo Mourning ('00---unanimous)
32. Walt Frazier ('72---non-unanimous ('70, '71))
33. James Harden ('15---unanimous)
34. Artis Gilmore ('75---unanimous)
35. Elgin Baylor ('61---unanimous)
36. Bob Pettit ('63---non-unanimous ('61))
37. Bob Lanier ('74---unanimous)
38. Kevin McHale ('87---non-unanimous ('86))
39. Willis Reed ('69---non-unanimous ('70))
40. Bob McAdoo ('75---unanimous)

I'm in, for sure. Top 50 would be good, but we should probably have only 24 or 36 hours for voting, otherwise it'll take too long and people will lose interest. Would be nice to finish it before the season begins.

I'm new here and I would like to participate in this project. What do I have to do to be in? Maybe I'm not the most knowledgeable poster on RealGM, but I know history of NBA quite well and I'm still learning new things here. What should I do?

70sFan wrote:I'm new here and I would like to participate in this project. What do I have to do to be in? Maybe I'm not the most knowledgeable poster on RealGM, but I know history of NBA quite well and I'm still learning new things here. What should I do?

All you have to do is to stay active and contribute to discussions. I'm pretty sure you could add something valuable here, mainly on 60s/70s players.

Quotatious wrote:I'm in, for sure. Top 50 would be good, but we should probably have only 24 or 36 hours for voting, otherwise it'll take too long and people will lose interest. Would be nice to finish it before the season begins.

24 hours seems a little short. I often remember life interfering for folks, and they'd not get in with their votes/comments until the 36 hour mark or so.
Maybe we could do a 36-hour schedule. I'll wait to hear input from others on this account.

70sFan wrote:I'm new here and I would like to participate in this project. What do I have to do to be in? Maybe I'm not the most knowledgeable poster on RealGM, but I know history of NBA quite well and I'm still learning new things here. What should I do?

Unless anyone else objects, I'd be willing to welcome you in presently, based on what you've already been contributing in the last couple weeks. There isn't an established quota of content required. Mostly we're just trying to guard against trolls, miscreants, and agenda-mongers (you don't appear to be any of these things).

Thanks for adding me, this will be really cool project

I'd be interested.

Btw, does anyone know when was the last time the peak project was done? It feels like it wasn't that long ago.

I would be interested in participating. Admit to being more familiar with post 2000 players, but am interested in learning more about older players and will be following this regardless.

Also am I correct in assuming it's a 1 year type of peak? Not like a one series or one game peak or anything?

Sign me up


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

I'm interested. 36 hour voting period sounds good.

Mutnt wrote:I'd be interested.

Btw, does anyone know when was the last time the peak project was done? It feels like it wasn't that long ago.

As far as I can tell, it's been 3 years.

btw, I noticed on the last project a specified year for each player peak was stated. As there can be disagreement on which year is the peak for certain players (e.g. Lebron--->many think it's '09, many think it's '13 or '12), I propose that player gets credit for all votes he receives in a round, regardless of the year designated. For instance, if in a given round '09 Lebron received 17 pts, and '13 Lebron received 16 pts, and '12 Lebron received 12 pts.....we'll just count that as 45 pts for Lebron. Otherwise it's as though we're penalizing a player for having a longer sustained peak. Anyone disagree? (will copy this section to OP)

trex_8063 wrote:

Mutnt wrote:I'd be interested.

Btw, does anyone know when was the last time the peak project was done? It feels like it wasn't that long ago.

As far as I can tell, it's been 3 years.

btw, I noticed on the last project a specified year for each player peak was stated. As there can be disagreement on which year is the peak for certain players (e.g. Lebron--->many think it's '09, many think it's '13 or '12), I propose that player gets credit for all votes he receives in a round, regardless of the year designated. For instance, if in a given round '09 Lebron received 17 pts, and '13 Lebron received 16 pts, and '12 Lebron received 12 pts.....we'll just count that as 45 pts for Lebron. Otherwise it's as though we're penalizing a player for having a longer sustained peak. Anyone disagree? (will copy this section to OP)

Sounds aight.

trex_8063 wrote:

Mutnt wrote:I'd be interested.

Btw, does anyone know when was the last time the peak project was done? It feels like it wasn't that long ago.

As far as I can tell, it's been 3 years.

btw, I noticed on the last project a specified year for each player peak was stated. As there can be disagreement on which year is the peak for certain players (e.g. Lebron--->many think it's '09, many think it's '13 or '12), I propose that player gets credit for all votes he receives in a round, regardless of the year designated. For instance, if in a given round '09 Lebron received 17 pts, and '13 Lebron received 16 pts, and '12 Lebron received 12 pts.....we'll just count that as 45 pts for Lebron. Otherwise it's as though we're penalizing a player for having a longer sustained peak. Anyone disagree? (will copy this section to OP)

Agreed with everything said there.

eminence wrote:I would be interested in participating. Admit to being more familiar with post 2000 players, but am interested in learning more about older players and will be following this regardless.

Also am I correct in assuming it's a 1 year type of peak? Not like a one series or one game peak or anything?

I'm fine with you aboard from the limited amount I've seen of your posting. Will check in with some of the other regs to be sure there are no objections and get back to you.

It would be appreciated, though, if you attempt to get somewhat "up to speed" on pre-90/00's players before the project starts, just so there isn't unintended (but nonetheless overt) era-bias in your voting. Some of the threads in the top 100 project (links are with the stickied list thread) are perhaps a decent resources to gain some perspective on certain older players.

trex_8063 wrote:

eminence wrote:I would be interested in participating. Admit to being more familiar with post 2000 players, but am interested in learning more about older players and will be following this regardless.

Also am I correct in assuming it's a 1 year type of peak? Not like a one series or one game peak or anything?

I'm fine with you aboard from the limited amount I've seen of your posting. Will check in with some of the other regs to be sure there are no objections and get back to you.

It would be appreciated, though, if you attempt to get somewhat "up to speed" on pre-90/00's players before the project starts, just so there isn't unintended (but nonetheless overt) era-bias in your voting. Some of the threads in the top 100 project (links are with the stickied list thread) are perhaps a decent resources to gain some perspective on certain older players.

Thanks, the top 100 list seems like a great place to start on that.

eminence wrote:

trex_8063 wrote:

Mutnt wrote:I'd be interested.

Btw, does anyone know when was the last time the peak project was done? It feels like it wasn't that long ago.

As far as I can tell, it's been 3 years.

btw, I noticed on the last project a specified year for each player peak was stated. As there can be disagreement on which year is the peak for certain players (e.g. Lebron--->many think it's '09, many think it's '13 or '12), I propose that player gets credit for all votes he receives in a round, regardless of the year designated. For instance, if in a given round '09 Lebron received 17 pts, and '13 Lebron received 16 pts, and '12 Lebron received 12 pts.....we'll just count that as 45 pts for Lebron. Otherwise it's as though we're penalizing a player for having a longer sustained peak. Anyone disagree? (will copy this section to OP)

Agreed with everything said there.

I still think it would be worthwhile to designate a year you think is a player's peak, as I'll likely include this info in the list. Just wrt scoring each round, we'll add all vote-receiving years up.

In contentious cases (such as LeBron - are we going with 2009, 2013 or other year as his peak?), I think we should definitely create separate threads where the eligible voters would give their reasoning why they think this year or that year was that player's peak (or even just add a one day poll).

I saw that LeBron was penalized for the fact that people couldn't come up with a consensus year as his peak, and he ended up at number 10 or thereabouts - otherwise could've made the top 5, as I'm sure he will, this time.

Quotatious wrote:In contentious cases (such as LeBron - are we going with 2009, 2013 or other year as his peak?), I think we should definitely create separate threads where the eligible voters would give their reasoning why they think this year or that year was that player's peak (or even just add a one day poll).

I saw that LeBron was penalized for the fact that people couldn't come up with a consensus year as his peak, and he ended up at number 10 or thereabouts - otherwise could've made the top 5, as I'm sure he will, this time.

I've floated the idea before that in cases like this we simply vote "Lebron" and then maybe have a 12 or 24 hour voting thread where we decide the year. Of course the counter is the hypothetical "I have 09 LeBron>86 Bird>13 LeBron", but I do wonder how much this would come up in practice, especially as we get away from the top guys and move more toward the well-defined peaks.

Anyway, consider this my entry as well.

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?

Quotatious wrote:In contentious cases (such as LeBron - are we going with 2009, 2013 or other year as his peak?), I think we should definitely create separate threads where the eligible voters would give their reasoning why they think this year or that year was that player's peak (or even just add a one day poll).

I saw that LeBron was penalized for the fact that people couldn't come up with a consensus year as his peak, and he ended up at number 10 or thereabouts - otherwise could've made the top 5, as I'm sure he will, this time.

I'd be fine facilitating a separate thread where we can hash out the consensus on which is the peak year (AFTER the player is voted in) which can run as an aside to the main peaks project.

fpliii wrote: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?

See above and prior posts. It would be nice to distinguish a year, so we'll likely have a side-thread to find a consensus; but ultimately that is (imo) of secondary importance to the player order.