RealGM

1. Michael Jordan
2. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
3. Lebron James
4. ?????


Please begin. Target stop time for this thread will be sometime Tuesday morning (usually going to be somewhere around 11am EST as long as I'm running things, though will need penbeast0 to pinch-hit for me next weekend).

eminence wrote:.

penbeast0 wrote:.

Clyde Frazier wrote:.

PaulieWal wrote:.

Colbini wrote:.

Texas Chuck wrote:.

drza wrote:.

Dr Spaceman wrote:.

fpliii wrote:.

Hornet Mania wrote:.

Eddy_JukeZ wrote:.

SactoKingsFan wrote:.

Blackmill wrote:.

JordansBulls wrote:.

RSCS3_ wrote:.

BasketballFan7 wrote:.

micahclay wrote:.

PockyCandy wrote:.

ardee wrote:.

RCM88x wrote:.

Tesla wrote:.

Joao Saraiva wrote:.

LA Bird wrote:.

MyUniBroDavis wrote:.

kayess wrote:.

2klegend wrote:.

MisterHibachi wrote:.

70sFan wrote:.

mischievous wrote:.

Doctor MJ wrote:.

Dr Positivity wrote:.

Jaivl wrote:.

Bad Gatorade wrote:.

andrewww wrote:.

colts18 wrote:.

Moonbeam wrote:.

Cyrusman122000 wrote:.

Winsome Gerbil wrote:.

Narigo wrote:.

wojoaderge wrote:.

TrueLAfan wrote:.

90sAllDecade wrote:.

Outside wrote:.

scabbarista wrote:.

janmagn wrote:.

lebron3-14-3 wrote:.

Arman_tanzarian wrote:.

Freighttrain wrote:.

Doormatt wrote:.

ZeppelinPage wrote:.

Wavy Q wrote:.

Bill Russell had 5 MVPs, 11 championships. We could assume that he would have had 12 or 13 All Defensive first teams had the award been around back then also

He led the league in defensive win shares 11 times and is the all time leader in defensive win shares.

5 x rebound leader
4 x was top 7 in assists
4 x was top 5 in FG%
(may have led league in blocks several times)

Also, you have to note that his championships came, at times, with as many as 7 hall of famers on his roster. There were only 8 teams, and he usually only had to play 2 rounds in the playoffs. His teammate Bob Cousy won an MVP while playing with Russell.

However hardly ever was upset in any playoff series and when it happened it was due to injury. Tied for the 2nd most MVP's in History and has the most titles (albeit 8 of those came due to playing only 2 series, so that doesn't equate the same nowadays from the 80's forward when you needed to win 4 series to get 1 title.)

1st Vote: Bill Russell
2nd Vote: Magic Johnson or Tim Duncan or Hakeem or Shaq. Leaning towards Magic Johnson

Bill Russell is clearly the most dominant player in his era in the history of the NBA (again, with the possible exception of Mikan who I have not studied in enough depth to make this statement).

My second choice right now is Wilt. He is so individually dominant, like prime Shaq but for appreciably longer despite an era where careers were shorter, that I think he has to be in the mix. I do agree that his strongest impact was defensively despite his unwillingness to chase shooters out on the floor; in his era with the extra need for rim protection and rebounding that might not be as bad a choice unless you are as quick as Russell.
He has a knock against him for not being a winner but when NOT playing against Bill Russell (against, most impactful player in NBA history) his playoff series win % was just over 80%, slightly higher than Michael Jordan's career playoff series win % which is extraordinary.

Again, my focus is on impact in era modified by some degree of strength of era calculation. The 60s were a strong decade with lots of great talent concentrated on a relatively few teams. For that whole decade, the NBA was basically Russell v. Wilt, the greatest impact player of all time v. the greatest statistical player of all time, this despite the presence of great players like Oscar, West, Pettit, and Baylor. They were that dominant that anyone else even challenging them seriously was a shock.

CHOICE: Bill Russell
2nd: Wilt Chamberlain (though open to changing to Mikan or even Tim Duncan if strong arguments convince me, I can't see Shaq, Hakeem, Magic, or Bird having the consistent decade long impact that Wilt did.)

I will get an early vote in for Wilt. He's 4th nearly tied for 3rd in career PER, 5th in all time points. All time rebound leader by a significant margin.

Excelled and won championships in multiple different roles. May add more later, but wanted to get this in while i have the chance.

2nd vote Duncan.

Probably voting Russell for the 4th straight thread, but would love to hear some Russell vs Duncan arguments as I have these 2 well clear of the field at this point.

Thinking of Shaq vs Wilt for this spot. Similar peaks and primes. Any opinions on this comparison?

Ok I guess I'm finally partecipating.
4th: Wilt
5th: Bill.

I will edit later

Thank God none of the remaining guys in contention were LeBron's teammates, otherwise they'd be worse now that he's out of the conversation.

Anyway, Duncan, Garnett, Shaq, and Hakeem are next in some order.

Shaq is a clear half-tier above all of them in peak impact (incredible when you consider how high their peaks were), and his durability issues don't really matter that much, and he has a ton of superstar impact years (his early Orlando and early Miami years are particularly underrated, I feel) that is just slightly below the superstar longevity of Duncan/Garnett. Hakeem's in a similar boat, but I think he peaked lower than Shaq, so that leaves him in a tie with KG/Timmy for now.

The main thing I can't get over at this point: I implore you guys to read Regulator's post on TD, which makes an extremely compelling case that the Spurs' culture could have only been built around him, and no one else. To have that massive an effect on winning (even when you're gone!) is some GOAT level stuff, and while I was probably admittedly gave him too much credit for stuff he's done while he's away, perhaps it's time to consider that the great team circumstances around Tim Duncan were caused by Tim Duncan himself (not to take away from Pop, of course, who is a genius.)

I think that alone puts Timmy above everyone else left, with only Shaq's monstrous peak impact able to come close. So for now:

Edit: Russell is by far the GOAT based on impact, and a winning culture similar to the one Duncan would later build, and if forced to rank all players regardless of era, he should be everyone's #1.

Will have to think on Wilt vs. everyone: my sense is that impact wise Wilt is up there with Shaq, but couldn't keep it up as long as he did. And though he was far more portable ('72), it doesn't really matter here because Shaq WILL bend his, and the other team's strategies to suit/play around him.

Less self-destructive than Shaq, so Shaq is the easy choice for now between the two, with Duncan ahead for aforementioned reasons.

Vote 1: Russell
Vote 2: Tim Duncan

kayess wrote:Thank God none of the remaining guys in contention were LeBron's teammates, otherwise they'd be worse now that he's out of the conversation.

Anyway, Duncan, Garnett, Shaq, and Hakeem are next in some order.

Shaq is a clear half-tier above all of them in peak impact (incredible when you consider how high their peaks were), and his durability issues don't really matter that much, and he has a ton of superstar impact years (his early Orlando and early Miami years are particularly underrated, I feel) that is just slightly below the superstar longevity of Duncan/Garnett. Hakeem's in a similar boat, but I think he peaked lower than Shaq, so that leaves him in a tie with KG/Timmy for now.

The main thing I can't get over at this point: I implore you guys to read Regulator's post on TD, which makes an extremely compelling case that the Spurs' culture could have only been built around him, and no one else. To have that massive an effect on winning (even when you're gone!) is some GOAT level stuff, and while I was probably admittedly gave him too much credit for stuff he's done while he's away, perhaps it's time to consider that the great team circumstances around Tim Duncan were caused by Tim Duncan himself (not to take away from Pop, of course, who is a genius.)

I think that alone puts Timmy above everyone else left, with only Shaq's monstrous peak impact able to come close. So for now:

Vote 1: Timmy d
Vote 2: Shaq

How come you're not considering Wilt here? He has as good a peak as any of them, maybe better. And it's not like he's Walton with his longevity.

MisterHibachi wrote:Thinking of Shaq vs Wilt for this spot. Similar peaks and primes. Any opinions on this comparison?

Interesting that you went with the offensive bigs right after I went with the defensive ones. (yes I know that all 4 of them, including Russell are all 2-way players, but speaking in terms of where they provide the most value.)

Wilt is a guy I really struggle with. Statistically what he did is just hard to even wrap my mind around. But how much of that was really added value and how much was it him just cannibalizing his teammates numbers for his own? His greatness team successes came when he cut his shots way down. I just don't know how to put him into a context I am totally happy with.

Meanwhile Shaq's teams thrived when his usage was at its highest. Feeding the big man was absolutely the right strategy and I think there is a real argument that he got under-utilized at times.

On the flip side, Wilt was ridiculously durable and played stupid minutes. Shaq in the RS wasn't nearly so dependable. This has to count for something meaningful. And how much does Wilt suffer that he spent so much of his career being the foil to the superior Russell? And unlike say Durant and Lebron in recent years, they faced each other in the playoffs a ton with Russell and his team getting the upper hand time and again. Is it fair to Wilt if your career lands you competing directly against the highest impact player of all-time?

I lean Shaq over Wilt because I feel like his game lent itself better to team success tho again his ego and inability to coexist with Kobe long-term is a negative for me. If Wade doesn't lose his mind in a year when the rules changed to make a player like Wade even more effective and if Dirk plays just a bit better in the Finals then he doesn't have that title without Kobe and I think his narrative changes considerably.

kayess wrote:Thank God none of the remaining guys in contention were LeBron's teammates, otherwise they'd be worse now that he's out of the conversation.

Anyway, Duncan, Garnett, Shaq, and Hakeem are next in some order.

Shaq is a clear half-tier above all of them in peak impact (incredible when you consider how high their peaks were), and his durability issues don't really matter that much, and he has a ton of superstar impact years (his early Orlando and early Miami years are particularly underrated, I feel) that is just slightly below the superstar longevity of Duncan/Garnett. Hakeem's in a similar boat, but I think he peaked lower than Shaq, so that leaves him in a tie with KG/Timmy for now.

The main thing I can't get over at this point: I implore you guys to read Regulator's post on TD, which makes an extremely compelling case that the Spurs' culture could have only been built around him, and no one else. To have that massive an effect on winning (even when you're gone!) is some GOAT level stuff, and while I was probably admittedly gave him too much credit for stuff he's done while he's away, perhaps it's time to consider that the great team circumstances around Tim Duncan were caused by Tim Duncan himself (not to take away from Pop, of course, who is a genius.)

I think that alone puts Timmy above everyone else left, with only Shaq's monstrous peak impact able to come close. So for now:

Vote 1: Timmy d
Vote 2: Shaq

I think it's even more clear that the Boston culture was built around Russell's skills; in the early years, everyone else was offensively oriented (except Lotscutoff) but they won with dominating defense to an extent that no one else in NBA history ever approached. David Robinson had built a winning Spurs culture of unselfish defensively oriented play that Tim Duncan came into; Tim's run was better than the Admiral's and he won it all but you can't say that stylistically the Duncan years were that different from the Robinson years except for higher talent level around him and the increased use of the 3 pointer and motion offense that the league was moving toward.

So, no, that doesn't make Tim Duncan above everyone else and it's not close. I notice you don't have either Russel, Wilt, Magic, or Bird even in consideration for your next four . . . any explanation?

Texas Chuck wrote:

MisterHibachi wrote:Thinking of Shaq vs Wilt for this spot. Similar peaks and primes. Any opinions on this comparison?

Interesting that you went with the offensive bigs right after I went with the defensive ones. (yes I know that all 4 of them, including Russell are all 2-way players, but speaking in terms of where they provide the most value.)

Wilt is a guy I really struggle with. Statistically what he did is just hard to even wrap my mind around. But how much of that was really added value and how much was it him just cannibalizing his teammates numbers for his own? His greatness team successes came when he cut his shots way down. I just don't know how to put him into a context I am totally happy with.

Meanwhile Shaq's teams thrived when his usage was at its highest. Feeding the big man was absolutely the right strategy and I think there is a real argument that he got under-utilized at times.

On the flip side, Wilt was ridiculously durable and played stupid minutes. Shaq in the RS wasn't nearly so dependable. This has to count for something meaningful. And how much does Wilt suffer that he spent so much of his career being the foil to the superior Russell? And unlike say Durant and Lebron in recent years, they faced each other in the playoffs a ton with Russell and his team getting the upper hand time and again. Is it fair to Wilt if your career lands you competing directly against the highest impact player of all-time?

I lean Shaq over Wilt because I feel like his game lent itself better to team success tho again his ego and inability to coexist with Kobe long-term is a negative for me. If Wade doesn't lose his mind in a year when the rules changed to make a player like Wade even more effective and if Dirk plays just a bit better in the Finals then he doesn't have that title without Kobe and I think his narrative changes considerably.

Wilt v. Shaq

Dominance v. League -- Wilt was the more dominant. He was at least arguably the more unstoppable offensive force (hard as that is to believe if you saw Shaq and not Wilt) due to his greater skill set though I certainly can see arguing the opposite and have done so at times, the more dominant defensive force (Warrior days more than Orlando Shaq, Sixer days over Laker Shaq, and Laker Wilt over post Laker Shaq) mainly due to the much greater emphasis on scoring close to the basket (I do think Shaq would have been as effective as Wilt at that in Wilt's era), the superior rebounder, and with his work ethic and the shape he kept himself in, he could play bigger minutes than Shaq (or, well, anyone), was injured less, and had a longer prime despite being in an era with lesser medical/training/equipment.

In terms of winning and disappointments, they are similar. Shaq was swept in the playoffs with competitive teams more than once; Wilt kept getting beat by Russell. I will point out (again) that Wilt's win% against any team that didn't start Bill Russell was an atronomical 80%+ so he was dominating everyone else in the playoffs as well (more defense and even more rebounding though less scoring as coaches tried out more gimmick defenses with multiple defenders on Wilt . . . even the Celtics). Since I believe Wilt's competition at center was also clearly stronger than Shaq's (though, again, I would guess the 00s were a deeper era overall) I think the case for Wilt v. Shaq is pretty clear.

The case for Shaq


Prime:

Shaq's 6 year prime is right up there with MJ. 98-03, Shaq was the best player in the league every year of that span with the exception of 99.


Regular season:
28.1 PPG
11.8 Reb
3.1 AST
2.8 Turnovers
2.4 Blk
.577 FG%
.585 TS%
29.9 PER
.255 WS/48

He lead the league in PER and FG% every year from 98-02

Postseason:
29.3 PPG
13.7 Reb
3.0 AST
2.4 BLK
.554 FG%
.565 TS%
29.6 PER
.228 WS/48

During the 3peat years he averaged 30-15-3, .55 FG%, 29.3 PER (that's right, his PER was better outside the 3 peat years than during them) - See more at: viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1124737#sthash.lqQVN3ib.dpuf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Playoff prime

Shaq's playoff prime was amazing. From 95-04, Shaq averaged 27-13-3, 56 FG%. Amazing when you consider that according to ElGee, Shaq faced the toughest postseason defensive slate of any superstar of the past 25 years.

Peak:
In this thread I made the case for Shaq having the GOAT peak in 2000. 2000 was Shaq's defensive peak and possibly his best offensive year.

viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1236093" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

RAPM:
Shaq has not only dominated in box score stats, he also fares well in plus/minus stats especially on offense.
2001: 2nd (1st in offense)
2002: 1st (1st in offense, 4th in defense, ahead of Duncan and D-Rob)
2003: 3rd (1st in offense)
2004: 1st (1st in offense, 26th in defense)
2005: 3rd (5th in offense)
2006: 5th (5th in offense)



Missed games:
Shaq missed a lot of games in his prime, but the missed games did a lot to show his impact. His teams were consistently worse without him than with him. He has a big enough missed game sample size to accurately gauge his impact.

SRS


From 93-06, Shaq’s teams were a weighted 5.81 SRS in the games he played, and a 1.22 SRS in the games he missed for a total impact of 4.60 SRS. His teams were 97-78 (.554) in the games he missed. His teams played 45.5 win pace in the games he missed and a 59.8 win pace in the games he played (+14.4 win impact).

Kobe vs Shaq
The games that Shaq and Kobe missed from 1998-2004 showed which guy was more important to the success of the team. The Lakers were mediocre without Shaq, but in the games Kobe missed, they didn’t miss a beat.
Games Kobe missed and Shaq played in, 98-04:

28-6 (.824, 68 win pace)
5.90 SRS
Games Shaq missed, 98-04:
33-31 (.516, 42 win pace)
0.58 SRS

01-04 plus/minus stats:
Shaq/Kobe on court: +9.2 points per 100 possessions
Shaq, no Kobe: +5.2 per 100
Kobe, no Shaq: -2.9 per 100
No Shaq or Kobe: -7.3 per 100

Playoffs:
Shaq/Kobe on court: +7.9 per 100
Shaq, no Kobe: -3.7 per 100
Kobe, no Shaq: -13.4 per 100
No Shaq or Kobe: -10 per 100

Finals:

Shaq put up one of the most impressive stat ever in the finals. In the finals, Shaq had at least 25-10 and 52 FG% in every single game of his first 20 finals games. Shaq didn't average 25-10 and 52 FG% in that 20 game finals run, he put those numbers in every single finals game. He had 0 bad finals games until 2006. Here are his numbers in his first 20 finals games

34.2 PPG, 60.3 FG%, .601 TS%, 14.5 Reb, 4.0 AST, 2.8 BLK


In the finals during the 3peat years, he averaged 36-15-4, 3 blk, 60 FG%. He put 30-10 in 13 out of 15 3 peat finals games (including every game of Nets and Pacers series).


Shaq vs Elite centers

Shaq dominated every single great center he faced head to head. That includes Hakeem, Ewing, Robinson, Zo, Daughtery, and Ben Wallace.

Warning: long read in spoiler tags



Defense

More on Shaq's Defense

Here are some facts from Hoopsstats.com. Here are the best opposing Center PPG and FG% defense since hoopsstats started collecting the stat (from 1998-2013)

Top opponent Center PPG defense from 98-13:
06 Heat: 12.8 PPG (Shaq)
04 Lakers: 12.9 PPG (Shaq)
06 Jazz: 12.9 PPG

Top opponent Center FG% defense from 98-13:
00 Lakers: 40.7 FG% (Shaq)
99 Spurs: 41.1 FG% (Duncan/Robinson)
99 Hawks: 41.9 FG% (Mutombo)
Shaq’s teams finished #1 in 00 and 05, #2 in 01, 02 and #3 in 98 and 06.




Playoff Defense:

Shaq has also played really good man defense in the playoffs. He has quite a few notable series where he limits the efficiency of his opponents:

Reposting because it's relevant:

I want to post a few +/- stats, as well as a few others comparing the modern players in contention, just for the sake of reference/discussion. All RAPM in this post is from Doc's scaled sheets, and only goes to 2012 (note: is there any way to update the scaled/sd sheets with numbers from 2013-2017? Has it been done?)

RAPM peak:
Lebron - 13.74
O'Neal - 12.82
Garnett - 12.65
Dirk - 11.50
Duncan - 11.39

RAPM 5-Sum:
Garnett - 54.33
Lebron - 52.33
O'Neal - 51.74
Duncan - 46.27
Dirk - 45.63

Cumulative RAPM Sum:
Garnett - 120.96
Duncan - 106.34
Dirk - 82.28
O'Neal - 80.38
Lebron - 71.78

Prime WOWY:
Garnett - 5.7
Lebron - 5.7
O'Neal - 5.5
Duncan - 4.1
Russell - 3.8
Nowitzki - 1.8
Chamberlain - 1.2

Prime WOWYR:
Lebron - 8.5
Dirk - 7.1
O'Neal - 6.7
Russell - 6.4
Garnett - 6.2
Chamberlain - 6.0
Duncan - 5.7

Career WOWYR:
Lebron - 7.4
Russell - 6.2
Chamberlain - 6.1
O'Neal - 5.2
Dirk - 5.1
Duncan - 4.7
Garnett - 4.4

Career Estimated Impact (expected titles) through 2014:
Duncan - 3.6
Lebron - 3.5
O'Neal - 3.4
Chamberlain - 3.2
Russell - 2.5
Garnett - 2.3
Dirk - 2.2

Peak EI:
Lebron - 8.9
O'Neal - 7.8
Chamberlain - 6.7
Garnett - 6.6
Duncan - 6.2
Dirk - 5.4
Russell - 4.9


These kinda run the gamut of stat types - box score based, +/-, and with/without.

Any thoughts?

colts18 wrote:.

Shaq's 6 year prime isn't up there with Jordan's. Overall talent wise, certainly. He had over 90 games he missed during that time. I think his longevity/durability is a significant knock against him. That's why I have players like Duncan and KG above him; they were a step lower in peak, but they sustained it with more durability and for more years.

MisterHibachi wrote:How come you're not considering Wilt here? He has as good a peak as any of them, maybe better. And it's not like he's Walton with his longevity.

penbeast0 wrote:

Essentially: why no Wilt, Russell, Bird and Magic?

Russell first: Agreed that he's by far the GOAT when we don't account for era (and as stated before - my stance on era is in flux), and fair enough on the point about his culture. I do think you can only beat who was in front of you, that saying "basketball was a different game then" is a dangerous game to play (otherwise, you'd have to adjust for every era), but that it was sufficiently different then that using our normal comparative logic is just going to result in Russell, by far the GOAT conclusions no matter how you slice it (although lorak's analysis is interesting - suggesting that Russell wasn't as impactful as we thought he was.)

So then when I decide to account for era - I realize that ties into Wilt as well - I either have to leave him out or proclaim him such an outlier that he's essentially like top 0 - inarguably the best, so let's just see who's playing for second. So for now, unless someone proposes a fair way of comparing across eras, Russell is out because he's way better than anyone else ever, and Wilt, while not on that same level, can't be evaluated as well, so I can't rank him.

Magic/Bird: sorry, I probably should spoiler my pre-list/criteria so that there is context... But I simply believe that these 4 guys were more impactful in their prime, and had far better longevity. If you want to argue that Magic's career would have gotten extended, then fine, he gets into this group - but for Bird it isn't really arguable that his longevity is close to theirs, and it's not like his peak was far superior to any of theirs to make up for the lack of longevity (which completely kills his expected championships total compared to them).

Magic's a bit better - he was still playing well in '91 and led the Lakers to the Finals - but upon revisiting past projects, it feels like his early 80s years were overrated due to that one game... at best (a huge stretch), he was equal to Bird, who I thought wasn't as impactful/good in the early 80s as those 4 in say, late 80s (Hakeem), mid 90s (Shaq), and early 00s (KG/ Duncan).

1st Vote: Bill Russell
2nd Vote: Tim Duncan

I think depending on your criteria Bill Russell is the last remaining possible GOAT candidate (Wilt possibly as well, although I would disagree). Both Russell and Duncan in terms of a great career have really no kinks in their armor, nearly flawless. Russell was a TOP 5 MVP candidate for 11 years and was the main driving force to the most dominant team run in NBA history (arguably American team sports history?). I do not have too much to really say for him as his resume speaks for itself. The main argument that I see come around is his offensive short-comings/overall statistical production--- what I say to that is that during his time he has a contemporary that is perhaps the most dominant scorer/statistical monster in NBA history, and during this span where their careers coincided Russell was more often viewed by those who watched as a more impactful player and the results back that up. Thats all I really need to know to validate him (as if he needed it).


Also, quick question for this project. This is all time top 100 greatest NBA/ABA players of all time right? We are not counting college/international play into this, are we? Just confirming.

@Colts18

The Lakers were built around Shaq, you could put MJ on that team and it would still likely show a massive +/- difference in on court/off court production in favour of Shaq. When your backup is either Mark Madsen or Slava Medvedenko, you can bet that Shaq will have much better numbers. He was easily the more irreplaceable player on the Lakers, but the better player in a vacuum is independent of this distinction.

micahclay wrote:Reposting because it's relevant:

I want to post a few +/- stats, as well as a few others comparing the modern players in contention, just for the sake of reference/discussion. All RAPM in this post is from Doc's scaled sheets, and only goes to 2012 (note: is there any way to update the scaled/sd sheets with numbers from 2013-2017? Has it been done?)

RAPM peak:
Lebron - 13.74
O'Neal - 12.82
Garnett - 12.65
Dirk - 11.50
Duncan - 11.39

RAPM 5-Sum:
Garnett - 54.33
Lebron - 52.33
O'Neal - 51.74
Duncan - 46.27
Dirk - 45.63

Cumulative RAPM Sum:
Garnett - 120.96
Duncan - 106.34
Dirk - 82.28
O'Neal - 80.38
Lebron - 71.78

Prime WOWY:
Garnett - 5.7
Lebron - 5.7
O'Neal - 5.5
Duncan - 4.1
Russell - 3.8
Nowitzki - 1.8
Chamberlain - 1.2

Prime WOWYR:
Lebron - 8.5
Dirk - 7.1
O'Neal - 6.7
Russell - 6.4
Garnett - 6.2
Chamberlain - 6.0
Duncan - 5.7

Career WOWYR:
Lebron - 7.4
Russell - 6.2
Chamberlain - 6.1
O'Neal - 5.2
Dirk - 5.1
Duncan - 4.7
Garnett - 4.4

Career Estimated Impact (expected titles) through 2014:
Duncan - 3.6
Lebron - 3.5
O'Neal - 3.4
Chamberlain - 3.2
Russell - 2.5
Garnett - 2.3
Dirk - 2.2

Peak EI:
Lebron - 8.9
O'Neal - 7.8
Chamberlain - 6.7
Garnett - 6.6
Duncan - 6.2
Dirk - 5.4
Russell - 4.9


These kinda run the gamut of stat types - box score based, +/-, and with/without.

Any thoughts?

Is this the list in each category of best ever? Or just the best of that group? I am assuming? We do not have MJ, Magic, Bird, Kareem, etc in there, I would like to see how they all look in comparison, that is if someone has it.

Tesla wrote:

micahclay wrote:Reposting because it's relevant:

I want to post a few +/- stats, as well as a few others comparing the modern players in contention, just for the sake of reference/discussion. All RAPM in this post is from Doc's scaled sheets, and only goes to 2012 (note: is there any way to update the scaled/sd sheets with numbers from 2013-2017? Has it been done?)

RAPM peak:
Lebron - 13.74
O'Neal - 12.82
Garnett - 12.65
Dirk - 11.50
Duncan - 11.39

RAPM 5-Sum:
Garnett - 54.33
Lebron - 52.33
O'Neal - 51.74
Duncan - 46.27
Dirk - 45.63

Cumulative RAPM Sum:
Garnett - 120.96
Duncan - 106.34
Dirk - 82.28
O'Neal - 80.38
Lebron - 71.78

Prime WOWY:
Garnett - 5.7
Lebron - 5.7
O'Neal - 5.5
Duncan - 4.1
Russell - 3.8
Nowitzki - 1.8
Chamberlain - 1.2

Prime WOWYR:
Lebron - 8.5
Dirk - 7.1
O'Neal - 6.7
Russell - 6.4
Garnett - 6.2
Chamberlain - 6.0
Duncan - 5.7

Career WOWYR:
Lebron - 7.4
Russell - 6.2
Chamberlain - 6.1
O'Neal - 5.2
Dirk - 5.1
Duncan - 4.7
Garnett - 4.4

Career Estimated Impact (expected titles) through 2014:
Duncan - 3.6
Lebron - 3.5
O'Neal - 3.4
Chamberlain - 3.2
Russell - 2.5
Garnett - 2.3
Dirk - 2.2

Peak EI:
Lebron - 8.9
O'Neal - 7.8
Chamberlain - 6.7
Garnett - 6.6
Duncan - 6.2
Dirk - 5.4
Russell - 4.9


These kinda run the gamut of stat types - box score based, +/-, and with/without.

Any thoughts?

Is this the list in each category of best ever? Or just the best of that group? I am assuming? We do not have MJ, Magic, Bird, Kareem, etc in there, I would like to see how they all look in comparison, that is if someone has it.

RAPM only goes back to 97. The others, I picked just because they were relevant. I'll dig up the other top candidates later. I do remember Kareem's WOWY was kinda lackluster. Will post later.