RealGM

Point of this exercise is to try and visualize GOAT lists in a second dimension similar to how we view offense vs defense. Reality is somewhere between the two, but identifying the standouts in each approach should help evaluation.

Obviously some players might reside on both lists or an overall top 10 GOAT player might not reside on either list.

Obvious caveats:


Any names come to mind? I’ll share my lists shortly as I work through this.

Both lists would probably be roughly my actual top 10. I believe the best players make bad teams good and good teams great.

I think both are too vaguely defined and represent to absolute ends of a theoretical spectrum where most situations fall somewhere in between. This would make it difficult to make such lists, for me at least.

Using the common definitions, if you mean the top 10 high efficiency, low volume scoring, great defensive players who also passed well v. the average to below average efficiency, high volume scoring, lazy defensive players who were shoot first . . . . I take the first group.

anyone who is a an actual top 10 player in either category probably will be at worst top 20 in the other

Ceiling

LeBron
Kareem
Jordan
Russell
Garnett
Duncan
Hakeem
Shaq
Wilt
Magic

Floor

LeBron
Kareem
Jordan
Russell
Duncan
Hakeem
Wilt
Garnett
Shaq (unknown)
Kobe

Don't think the differences are big enough to move the needle that much, other than moving guys who I have as basically tied (the 5 to 9 big man, Kobe/Magic) a couple placings.

Careee value, obviously.

Hard to work out top tens, but I think these are guys who probably would perform better in one vs the other:

Floor Raisers:
LeBron, Robinson, Bird

Ceiling Raisers:
Russell, Curry, Magic

I'm not sure if it's enough for Bird and Robinson to make it into my top 10 or Curry and Magic to drop out of my top 10, though.

ceiling raiser wrote:Hard to work out top tens, but I think these are guys who probably would perform better in one vs the other:

Floor Raisers:
LeBron, Robinson, Bird

Ceiling Raisers:
Russell, Curry, Magic

I'm not sure if it's enough for Bird and Robinson to make it into my top 10 or Curry and Magic to drop out of my top 10, though.

Curious as to why David Robinson is more a floor raiser and why Magic is more a ceiling raiser. What's your thinking?

Ceiling raisers

MJ
Russell
Kobe
Magic
Shaq
Duncan
Bird
Curry
Lebron
Kareem

Floor Rasiers

Kareem
Lebron
Hakeem
Wilt
Russell
MJ
Duncan
Kobe
Shaq
Giannis/Drob

penbeast0 wrote:

ceiling raiser wrote:Hard to work out top tens, but I think these are guys who probably would perform better in one vs the other:

Floor Raisers:
LeBron, Robinson, Bird

Ceiling Raisers:
Russell, Curry, Magic

I'm not sure if it's enough for Bird and Robinson to make it into my top 10 or Curry and Magic to drop out of my top 10, though.

Curious as to why David Robinson is more a floor raiser and why Magic is more a ceiling raiser. What's your thinking?

The turnaround for the Spurs in Robinson’s first year and the title getting the Lakers over the hump in Magic’s rookie effort.

looking at the namea being given and ranked differently i am thinking the difference between being seen as a "floor raiser" and a "ceiling raiser" is purely situational and narrative

situational because how much talent you play with and how good of a fit you are can differentiate what you will be called

magic is seen as a ceiling raiser cause he joined a talented team where he fit like a glove, put him with moderate talent teams or a costar who is good only when the ball is in his hands rather than a stromg D center who scores points ultra efficiently with few possesions

suddendly he starts being seen as a "mere" floor raiser that doesnt fit well with other stars

narrative because of the idea that on-ball skills are floor raising skills so someone whose skills are mainly on-ball cannot be a floorraiser, as if pairing a dominant ball handler with great finishers, shooters, defenders and even other good ballhandler was not a recipe for dominant team

falcolombardi wrote:looking at the namea being given and ranked differently i am thinking the difference between being seen as a "floor raiser" and a "ceiling raiser" is purely situational and narrative

situational because how much talent you play with and how good of a fit you are can differentiate what you will be called

magic is seen as a ceiling raiser cause he joined a talented team where he fit like a glove, put him with moderate talent teams or a costar who is good only when the ball is in his hands rather than a stromg D center who scores points ultra efficiently with few possesions

suddendly he starts being seen as a "mere" floor raiser that doesnt fit well with other stars

narrative because of the idea that on-ball skills are floor raising skills so someone whose skills are mainly on-ball cannot be a floorraiser, as if pairing a dominant ball handler with great finishers, shooters, defenders and even other good ballhandler was not a recipe for dominant team

It's more result-based actually. Ceiling raisers can take a good supporting cast and take them to a title at a high rate. A floor raiser is someone who can take a bad supporting cast and elevate them beyond where they should be.

Ultimately ceiling raisers are more important because teams hope once a star is given a good cast, they can consistently take that team to the highest level.

An Unbiased Fan wrote:

falcolombardi wrote:looking at the namea being given and ranked differently i am thinking the difference between being seen as a "floor raiser" and a "ceiling raiser" is purely situational and narrative

situational because how much talent you play with and how good of a fit you are can differentiate what you will be called

magic is seen as a ceiling raiser cause he joined a talented team where he fit like a glove, put him with moderate talent teams or a costar who is good only when the ball is in his hands rather than a stromg D center who scores points ultra efficiently with few possesions

suddendly he starts being seen as a "mere" floor raiser that doesnt fit well with other stars

narrative because of the idea that on-ball skills are floor raising skills so someone whose skills are mainly on-ball cannot be a floorraiser, as if pairing a dominant ball handler with great finishers, shooters, defenders and even other good ballhandler was not a recipe for dominant team

It's more result-based actually. Ceiling raisers can take a good supporting cast and take them to a title at a high rate. A floor raiser is someone who can take a bad supporting cast and elevate them beyond where they should be.

Ultimately ceiling raisers are more important because teams hope once a star is given a good cast, they can consistently take that team to the highest level.

the top 10 floor raiser lists being posted are full of some of the biggest winners ever

Floor raisers : ball dominant, stat filler, 2 way player
Ceiling raisers: off ball, efficient, 3D

Floor Raisers:
LeBron, Hakeem, Bird

Ceiling Raisers:
Russell, Curry, MJ

cpower wrote:Floor raisers : ball dominant, stat filler, 2 way player
Ceiling raisers: off ball, efficient, 3D

Floor Raisers:
LeBron, Hakeem, Bird

Ceiling Raisers:
Russell, Curry, MJ

how are two way players not ceiling raisers?

An Unbiased Fan wrote:It's more result-based actually. Ceiling raisers can take a good supporting cast and take them to a title at a high rate. A floor raiser is someone who can take a bad supporting cast and elevate them beyond where they should be.

Ultimately ceiling raisers are more important because teams hope once a star is given a good cast, they can consistently take that team to the highest level.

^ This is how I see it. Given this definition I'd say:

Russell - Elite Ceiling Raiser. Never saw him without floor.

Wilt - Elite Floor Raiser/Respectable Ceiling Raiser

Kareem - Poor Floor Raiser/Elite Ceiling Raiser

Bird - Elite Floor Raiser/Elite Ceiling Raiser

Magic - Elite Floor Raiser/Elite Ceilng Raiser

Jordan - Elite Floor Raiser/Elite Ceilng Raiser

Hakeem - Poor Floor Raiser/Elite Ceiling Raiser

Shaq - Elite Ceiling Raiser. Never really saw him without a floor.

Kobe - Elite Foor Raiser/Elite Ceiling Raiser

Lebron - GOAT Floor Raiser/Poor Ceiling Raiser

Curry - Poor Floor Raiser/Elite Ceiling Raiser

Floor (peaks):
1. Wilt 64
2. MJ 88-90
3. Lebron 09-10

Ceiling (peaks):

1. Curry 2016
2. MJ 91-92
3. Kareem 77 or Shaq 00

Stalwart wrote:

An Unbiased Fan wrote:It's more result-based actually. Ceiling raisers can take a good supporting cast and take them to a title at a high rate. A floor raiser is someone who can take a bad supporting cast and elevate them beyond where they should be.

Ultimately ceiling raisers are more important because teams hope once a star is given a good cast, they can consistently take that team to the highest level.

Kareem - Poor Floor Raiser
Hakeem - Poor Floor Raiser

Those make no sense.

Well, every "poor" label makes no sense and you're of course going for the bait on LeBron fans, but those two are especially flagrant, considering what Kareem was able to do with craptastic casts in the mid 70s and Hakeem's 1994 ring.

Jaivl wrote:

Stalwart wrote:

An Unbiased Fan wrote:It's more result-based actually. Ceiling raisers can take a good supporting cast and take them to a title at a high rate. A floor raiser is someone who can take a bad supporting cast and elevate them beyond where they should be.

Ultimately ceiling raisers are more important because teams hope once a star is given a good cast, they can consistently take that team to the highest level.

Kareem - Poor Floor Raiser
Hakeem - Poor Floor Raiser

Those make no sense.

Well, every "poor" label makes no sense and you're of course going for the bait on LeBron fans, but those two are especially flagrant, considering what Kareem was able to do with craptastic casts in the mid 70s and Hakeem's 1994 ring.

Kareem was such a bad floor raiser when he led 1977 Lakers roster to the best record in the league and WCF while playing like the best player ever...

Jaivl wrote:

Stalwart wrote:

An Unbiased Fan wrote:It's more result-based actually. Ceiling raisers can take a good supporting cast and take them to a title at a high rate. A floor raiser is someone who can take a bad supporting cast and elevate them beyond where they should be.

Ultimately ceiling raisers are more important because teams hope once a star is given a good cast, they can consistently take that team to the highest level.

Kareem - Poor Floor Raiser
Hakeem - Poor Floor Raiser

Those make no sense.

Well, every "poor" label makes no sense and you're of course going for the bait on LeBron fans, but those two are especially flagrant, considering what Kareem was able to do with craptastic casts in the mid 70s and Hakeem's 1994 ring.

What was the difference between the 88-93 rosters that went home in the first round verses the one Hakkem took to a title in 94? How come Hakeem was able to win back to back titles with the 94-95 rosters but wasn't even able to compete with those previous rosters? Could it be that the 94 roster is alot better tgan you give credit for?