Impressive careers

[Gibson22]

This number of players won rings as the clear cut most impactful players of the team
1) Mikan
2) Arizin
3) Schayes
4) Pettit
5) Russell
6) Wilt
7) Jabbar
8) Barry
9) Walton
10) Magic
11) Bird
12) Moses
13) Jordan
14) Hakeem
15) Duncan
16) Shaq
17) Wade
18) Kobe
19) Dirk
20) Lebron
21) Curry
22) Leonard
23) Giannis
24) Jokic

This number of players won rings as 1a/1b or great value second fiddles while also having great careers:

1) Cousy
2) Havlicek
3) Reed
4) Frazier
5) Cowens
6) Unseld
7) Hayes
8) Julius
9) Pippen
10) David Robinson
11) KG
12) AD
13) KD
14) Thomas


This number of players were great contributors in dinastic teams or won at least 1 ring as clear cut #2

1) Sam Jones
2) Heinsohn
3) K.C Jones
4) Sharman
5) Debusschere
6) Worthy
7) Scott
8) Cooper
9) Wilkes
10) Nixon
11) Mchale
12) Parish
13) Dennis Johnson
14) dumars
15) laimbeer
16) Rodman
17) Horace Grant
18) Kukoc
19) Otis Thorpe
20) Vernon maxwell
21) Robert Horry
22) Ginobili
23) Parker
24) Bowen
25) Rick Fox
26) Odom
27) Fox
28) Bosh
29) Iguodala
30) Thompson
31) Green
32) Drexler
33) Irving
34) Gasol
35) Billy Cunningham
36) Hal Greer
37) Jamal Murray

This number of players were "peer" all star contributors in "team rings":

1) sikma
2) gus williams
3) rip hamilton
4) R.Wallace
5) B. Wallace
6) Billups
7) tayshaun prince
8) Pierce
9) Ray Allen
10) Rondo

MVP level, or high impact players who weren't able to win a ring as standout players

1) Robertson
2) West
3) Malone
4) Barkley
5) Stockton
6) Nash
7) Ewing
8) Harden
9) Baylor
10) Kidd
11) Miller
12) Jokic
13) Doncic
14) Embiid
15) Chris Paul



First team all nba tier (impact) who couldn't win rings as standout players:

1)Gervin
2) Dantley
3) Payton
4) Gilmore
5) Wesbtrook
6) Dwight
7) Mourning
8) Thurmond
9) Iverson
10) Mcgrady
11) Carter
12) English
13) Wilkins
14) McAdoo
15) Moncrief
16) Lillard
17) Carmelo
18) Walt bellamy
19) Jimmy Butler
20) Paul George
21) and a few others

Elite, longeve, impactful longeve players and great defenders still not listed

1) Shawn Marion
2) Jeff Hornacek
3) Cliff Hagan
4) Dikembe Mutombo
5) Bobby Jones
6) Kyle Lowry
7) Don Nelson
8) Danny Ainge
9) Ron Harper
10) McMillan
11) Mo Cheeks
12) Tony Allen
13) Danny Green
14) Metta World Peace
15) Battier
16) Kirilenko
17) Eaton
18) Chandler
19) Gobert
20) and a few other guys


Now, If I had to rank, and decide when to stop, when I don't consider ranking worthy anymore, I'd say, I'd rank all 24 the "ring alphas", from second group havlicek, frazier, erving, pippen, hayes, robinson, kg, ad, kd, making it 33, from the third groupd rodman and drexler and irving and cp3 fourth group only ben wallace. fifth group I'd rank west, robertson, dirk, karl malone, barkley, stockton, nash, ewing, harden, kidd, and miller, and projecting their careers obv doncic embiid and jokic. then i'd also rank gervin, dantley, payton, gilmore, mourning, thurmond, wilkins, moncrief, lillard, and jimmy butler, making it 61. last group I'd rank marion, mutombo, bobby jones, kyle lowry, artest, kirilenko. Making it 68 I may be forgetting a few guys. Obviously it's a lot of guys and I could easily cut some guys out, but I ranked guys that were best guys in championship teams, mvp level players, or high impact players.

[f4p]

pretty good lists. did you mean to have Dirk on the alpha and "no ring as a standout" list since he lost as an mvp? also, lists like this make it clear why people who try to rank harden in the 45-50 range are pretty out there. even if you ignore that the 2018 rockets are a top 20 team ever when healthy and were given nearly impossible circumstances to win, if you really want to cling to "he couldn't win it all", there's still only 24 guys who did it. and most lists don't even know who Arizin and Schayes are, so more like 22. and even if you put him behind all 22, there's what, 5 or 6 guys from the 1a/1b list who might have a case and 5 or 6 from the "no ring as a standout" who might have a case and then chris paul from the other 2 lists is probably the only other guy. like, there's just no way to come up with 45 guys with any consistent criteria who apparently have been so amazing in the playoffs while also somehow not winning a ring that they can overcome harden's fairly ridiculous regular season career advantage.

[falcolombardi]

Wouldnt gus williams be the alpha of the 79 sonics rather than dennis johnson or at least a co alpha situation (maybe 3-way alpha with sikma?)

He seems to be their most important offensive player at least although dennis johnson wom the finals mvp

[falcolombardi]

pretty good lists. did you mean to have Dirk on the alpha and "no ring as a standout" list since he lost as an mvp? also, lists like this make it clear why people who try to rank harden in the 45-50 range are pretty out there. even if you ignore that the 2018 rockets are a top 20 team ever when healthy and were given nearly impossible circumstances to win, if you really want to cling to "he couldn't win it all", there's still only 24 guys who did it. and most lists don't even know who Arizin and Schayes are, so more like 22. and even if you put him behind all 22, there's what, 5 or 6 guys from the 1a/1b list who might have a case and 5 or 6 from the "no ring as a standout" who might have a case and then chris paul from the other 2 lists is probably the only other guy. like, there's just no way to come up with 45 guys with any consistent criteria who apparently have been so amazing in the playoffs while also somehow not winning a ring that they can overcome harden's fairly ridiculous regular season career advantage.

Agree, on a player evaluation sense i dont think the 18 rockets are much worse (if at all) than the median championship team

Just were as unlucky with what year to contend as the 17 cavs, 96 sonics or 72 bucks

[Cavsfansince84]

Hagan won a ring as a clear 1b or #2. Also I wouldn't list anyone under 35 on one of the 'wasn't able to' lists and I'd consider including aba years for all of those lists for title purposes. I'd also bump Isiah down to the 1a/1b list.

[f4p]

Agree, on a player evaluation sense i dont think the 18 rockets are much worse (if at all) than the median championship team

Just were as unlucky with what year to contend as the 17 cavs, 96 sonics or 72 bucks

i suppose i could be biased, but i would say better than median. 29th best SRS ever, and did it without good health, with cp3 only playing 58 games and harden playing a career low (at that point) 72 games. in the 49 games they both played, the rockets were 44-5 with a +10.4 MOV against opponents with an SRS of +0.6, which i think is additive and makes the rockets a +11.0 SRS team when their 2 best players play. you look at teams like the 1967 76ers, 1972 lakers, 1996 bulls, and 2016 warriors, and it's basically every top 3 or 4 player on the team playing 80+ games with a 77 sprinkled in here and there. rodman only playing 64 games is basically the only significant time anyone missed. and then obviously the rockets backed it up in the playoffs by finding themselves up 3-2 when healthy on maybe the most talented roster ever. if harden was the one who got injured, i could see holding it against him, but obviously he can't keep cp3's hamstring from tearing.

[Gibson22]

pretty good lists. did you mean to have Dirk on the alpha and "no ring as a standout" list since he lost as an mvp? also, lists like this make it clear why people who try to rank harden in the 45-50 range are pretty out there. even if you ignore that the 2018 rockets are a top 20 team ever when healthy and were given nearly impossible circumstances to win, if you really want to cling to "he couldn't win it all", there's still only 24 guys who did it. and most lists don't even know who Arizin and Schayes are, so more like 22. and even if you put him behind all 22, there's what, 5 or 6 guys from the 1a/1b list who might have a case and 5 or 6 from the "no ring as a standout" who might have a case and then chris paul from the other 2 lists is probably the only other guy. like, there's just no way to come up with 45 guys with any consistent criteria who apparently have been so amazing in the playoffs while also somehow not winning a ring that they can overcome harden's fairly ridiculous regular season career advantage.

No, I didn't want to put dirk there

[SickMother]

Guessing your placement for Dr. J is based on NBA only?

He was Alpha Centauri for the 76 Nets.

[Texas Chuck]

Alpha is a loaded term that I wish we'd do away with, but KG was the best player on the Celtics when they won, so curious why he's on the 2nd list and not the first. Especially since Truth isn't even on your list as a clear #2.

[Gibson22]

Alpha is a loaded term that I wish we'd do away with, but KG was the best player on the Celtics when they won, so curious why he's on the 2nd list and not the first. Especially since Truth isn't even on your list as a clear #2.

My list is pretty messy, I should improve it. Anyway yeah, there's no doubt kg was the best player on the team, but, you know, pp won the fmvp and him and ray weren't that far off from him. I don't know, I tried to put it as a team ring (not that there's any ring that isn't won by team) but rondo ray and pp in the same category and kg lower than the clear cut #1s. I think that, compared to kg, the guys I put in the first list I think all have at least 1 ring where they had more impact compared to the rest of the team. But yeah, he's closer to the first list than most of the guys in the second. Anyway If you studied my lists you'd probably find some other incongruencies, as I said I guess it's pretty messy.
And yeah, I agree that alpha is a terrible term that I usually don't use, I just meant #1 most impactful

[Gibson22]

Guessing your placement for Dr. J is based on NBA only?

He was Alpha Centauri for the 76 Nets.

Yes, even tho I didn't like not putting him there

[Gibson22]

Guys would you add guys, make any fixes, etc?

[eminence]

Bob Davies from the Royals way back in the day should be on there somewhere, and theoretically one of his teammates (Wanzer?) somewhere lower.

I'd like Gobert added to one of the last two groups.

I'd consider moving Ben Wallace up to the 1a/1b tier. Thomas probably down to that tier.

I'd move Draymond/Manu up a tier to the 1b tier.

Last tier could obviously be expanded a fair amount, but it's a bit nebulous, so not bothered it's incomplete.

Hal Greer/Billy Cunningham should probably both fit somewhere and I'm sure others we're both forgetting.

A few of Mikans teammates (namely Pollard for me) somewhere in the lower dynasty tiers.

[Owly]

Guys would you add guys, make any fixes, etc?

Not sure "alpha" framework is often helpful in general.

Not sure "alpha" framework is helpful in ranking players (as it applied here).

Not sure what "alpha" means within this context, requires greater definition.

Not sure "weren't able to win a ring" or "couldn't win a ring" (as a distinct phrase from "didn't happen to win a ring") is a helpful device here. Arguably particularly harsh towards active players but a ... to this ear ... clunky phrasing in general.


Beside these qualms concerned by the absence of Gus Williams though I think you might mean him where "Gus Johnson" is.

Not sure why apart from latter day narrative boost Thomas is in with a group of serious MVP candidates (pretty crude tool but Arizin [74th .493] seems to be closest in MVP shares and he peaked before MVP was given out, played in a era where less shares are given out each year due to voting system changes and still has a 2nd place finish and vastly more than a single career 1st place vote [Thomas 93rd, .317]). Nor why there's a three tier gap between he and what I assume is Williams.

Hear great things about V Maxwell as a defender but given how playoff-title-year weighted this is (the only reason I can think of for West outside the top tier) Maxwell plays only the '94 team in terms of playoff contribution and whilst opposing 2s didn't shoot great, he shot worse for some ugly box composites (and some very ugly game BPMs versus Phoenix and New York). Without rewatching, gut would be to delete.

Not clear why Ginobili especially (could say Dray Green) is in the same group as a Rick Fox (whom I think is listed twice - Fisher intended??) and Maxwell.

Paul seems to be in the wrong tier given his production and impact profile especially with a heavy does of one dimensional scorers in that category.

If I'm correct Eaton nuked his defensive impact with his offensive impact and thus is circa net neutral and doesn't belong in a bucket of mostly clearly positive players.

Fwiw, if one is attached to "alpha on champ" as useful, I don't see the case for anyone but Cowens as alpha on '76 though I suppose alpha can mean different things.

Some instances (by no means comprehensive) of good, contributing players on title teams (that I didn't see)
FMVP Cedric Maxwell seems a glaring omission.
Dandridge absent (in either Mil or Was) seems curious.
Bailey Howell, though often weaker in the playoffs, seems like an oversight.
Neil Johnston warrants consideration (for instance has a title, slightly more productive peak, greater consistency of quality, greater accolades over a Bellamy though given the general tilt towards winners, Bellamy seems a notable inclusion).

This is all taking a brief glance, any misreadings are my own.


More generally fleshing out what terms mean, what you are hoping to achieve/communicate through these buckets, what they mean and a clearer explanation of how you're aggregating/putting them together at the end might make for a more productive exercise and greater engagement.

[SickMother]

Chet Walker looks like the pretty clear second best player on the 66/67 76ers to me...

Regular Season
Walker: 17.9 PER | .557 TS% | 180 TS Add | 10.1 WS | .181 WS/48
H Greer: 15.0 PER | .510 TS% | 59 TS Add | 7.6 WS | .118 WS/48
Billy C: 19.3 PER | .513 TS% | 58 TS Add | 6.8 WS | .151 WS/48

Playoffs
Walker: 17.6 PER | .546 TS% | 2.3 WS | .201 WS/48
H Greer: 16.1 PER | .487 TS% | 1.9 WS | .131 WS/48
Billy C: 15.4 PER | .432 TS% | 0.4 WS | .056 WS/48

Chet The Jet has to be one of the most overlooked efficient scorers of all time with his 109 TS+ and 1521 career TS add clocking it at similar efficiency & higher volume than more modern guys like Detlef (110 TS+ and 1409 TS Add) or Chauncey (109 TS+ and 1336 TS Add) or Peja (110 TS+ and 1185 TS Add) or Ginobli (109 TS+ and 1082 TS Add), but without the benefit of a three point line.

[Owly]

Bob Davies from the Royals way back in the day should be on there somewhere, and theoretically one of his teammates (Wanzer?) somewhere lower.

Otoh based on general recollection of playoff elevation from Wanzer, what I'm perceiving as the lists "playoff in winning year" tilt (West not in top tier) and the assumption that '51 is counted and NBL '46 probably isn't, suspect Wanzer should be at least as high, though am happy to hear both mentioned (and haven't checked even Reference never mind any finals books so ...).


To my prior notes I'll add Elie as a frequent useful contributor and Salley as a playoff elevator on title teams.

[eminence]

Chet Walker looks like the pretty clear second best player on the 66/67 76ers to me...

Regular Season
Walker: 17.9 PER | .557 TS% | 180 TS Add | 10.1 WS | .181 WS/48
H Greer: 15.0 PER | .510 TS% | 59 TS Add | 7.6 WS | .118 WS/48
Billy C: 19.3 PER | .513 TS% | 58 TS Add | 6.8 WS | .151 WS/48

Playoffs
Walker: 17.6 PER | .546 TS% | 2.3 WS | .201 WS/48
H Greer: 16.1 PER | .487 TS% | 1.9 WS | .131 WS/48
Billy C: 15.4 PER | .432 TS% | 0.4 WS | .056 WS/48

Chet The Jet has to be one of the most overlooked efficient scorers of all time with his 109 TS+ and 1521 career TS add clocking it at similar efficiency & higher volume than more modern guys like Detlef (110 TS+ and 1409 TS Add) or Chauncey (109 TS+ and 1336 TS Add) or Peja (110 TS+ and 1185 TS Add) or Ginobli (109 TS+ and 1082 TS Add), but without the benefit of a three point line.

I'd certainly have Walker over Cunningham for the '67 season, though I think I'd still lean Greer initially (efficiency can be a bit overrewarded in box score composite stats at times imo). Just a stream of thought thing though, should've remembered Chet, he deserves a mention somewhere

[Stalwart]

Alpha is a loaded term that I wish we'd do away with, but KG was the best player on the Celtics when they won, so curious why he's on the 2nd list and not the first. Especially since Truth isn't even on your list as a clear #2.

Alpha = Best player and Leader. KG was not the leader of the Boston Celtics. And if he was the best player it was only marginally so.

[Jaivl]

Alpha is a loaded term that I wish we'd do away with, but KG was the best player on the Celtics when they won, so curious why he's on the 2nd list and not the first. Especially since Truth isn't even on your list as a clear #2.

Alpha = Best player and Leader. KG was not the leader of the Boston Celtics. And if he was the best player it was only marginally so.

Pretty much inarguably is, on both fronts.

[Stalwart]

Alpha is a loaded term that I wish we'd do away with, but KG was the best player on the Celtics when they won, so curious why he's on the 2nd list and not the first. Especially since Truth isn't even on your list as a clear #2.

Alpha = Best player and Leader. KG was not the leader of the Boston Celtics. And if he was the best player it was only marginally so.

Pretty much inarguably is, on both fronts.

You can say that but its simply not true. KG has never been a bus driver for a championship team.