What do you think of this GOAT list?
Moderators: PaulieWal, Doctor MJ, Clyde Frazier, penbeast0, trex_8063
What do you think of this GOAT list?
-
kooldude
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 4,823
- And1: 78
- Joined: Jul 08, 2007
-
LiquidFire
- Banned User
- Posts: 3,275
- And1: 3
- Joined: May 03, 2007
-
halfHAVOC
- Assistant Coach
- Posts: 3,864
- And1: 176
- Joined: Jul 19, 2006
- Contact:
-
yes because damon stoudamire and stephon marbury are on that list.... that makes it absolutely amazing.
Stream My New Basketball Anthem "KING": https://ampl.ink/7QwkY
-
RoyceDa59
- RealGM
- Posts: 23,921
- And1: 8,789
- Joined: Aug 25, 2002
-
This a list of probability for entry into the Hall of Fame but I would agree that the top 6 players of all time are also the top 6 players on that list, albiet I'd have them in a different order.
1. Michael Jordan
2. Kareem Abdul Jabbar
3. Wilt Chamberlain
4. Magic Johnson
5. Larry Bird
6. Bill Russell
Thats my top 6.
1. Michael Jordan
2. Kareem Abdul Jabbar
3. Wilt Chamberlain
4. Magic Johnson
5. Larry Bird
6. Bill Russell
Thats my top 6.
Go Raps!!
-
penbeast0
- Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
- Posts: 28,445
- And1: 8,679
- Joined: Aug 14, 2004
- Location: South Florida
-
actually, if you look, the top 20 on that list all have 100% so they are tied . . . it's based more on career numbers and particularly scoring than actual peak value to winning. Try the win shares list or something.
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
-
conleyorbust
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 4,837
- And1: 0
- Joined: May 24, 2007
penbeast0 wrote:actually, if you look, the top 20 on that list all have 100% so they are tied . . . it's based more on career numbers and particularly scoring than actual peak value to winning. Try the win shares list or something.
Yeah, the methodology explains what is taken into account.
As far as AI v. Kidd. For one it is a legit question as to why you think Kidd should be ahead of AI, but the methodology also states that it takes MVP awards into account. Since AI has one and Kidd doesn't, that's a big jump (this also explains why AI and KG are ahead of Kobe, MVPs are rated more highly than chips' won)
-
tsherkin
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 78,762
- And1: 20,188
- Joined: Oct 14, 2003
-
conleyorbust wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
Yeah, the methodology explains what is taken into account.
As far as AI v. Kidd. For one it is a legit question as to why you think Kidd should be ahead of AI, but the methodology also states that it takes MVP awards into account. Since AI has one and Kidd doesn't, that's a big jump (this also explains why AI and KG are ahead of Kobe, MVPs are rated more highly than chips' won)
Yeah, there is a formula used for HoF probability here.
It considers:
1. height (in inches)
2. last season indicator (1 if 1959-60 or before, 0 otherwise)
3. NBA points per game
4. NBA rebounds per game
5. NBA assists per game
6. NBA All-Star game selections
7. log(NBA MVP awards won + 0.5)
8. NBA championships won
Which is godawful and ridiculous as a rating system because it relies on per game averages and ignores efficiency.
BUT, it's not actually a rating system, it's a model predicting entry to the HoF and the idiots who run the basketball HoF and determine entry are swayed by these things, so it's generally a pretty good model.