RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - General Thread

[OhayoKD]

I understand this project has a lot of work, and some posters do an impressive job in their posts.
Still, I think MJ as the Goat is not a sure thing, and you can argue against.
Then, you see him 3rd... not sure if it's ok. Probably people get tired of see the same results.
Then, when you see KG in the top 10, and above Bird, Magic or even Curry, you see this is not right.

Sorry, but I had to said it.

Regarding the first bolded sentence—that’s not what happened.

Regarding the second bolded sentence—why is it not “right”? There were great reasons given for all.

Why?mmm let's see.

Magic played 9 finals in 13 years. Won 5 titles. Won 3 MVPS. He had a stacked team, but from 85 he was the best laker (and before that he was a key player). Do you think if KG was playing alongside Magic he would be playing the alpha role? or will be the excellent sidekick?
Bird 3 ring, 5 finals, 3 MVPs. He was the alpha since day 1. Do you think if KG was playing alongside Bird he would be the franchise player or he would be a McHale/Parrish kind of player?

Kg was good, of course, but he was not a capable #1 player. He was unable to raise his offensive production in playoffs. If you have a weak team you better improve your offensive production (look his FG%, really poor for a big man). He was not able to do it, and his deffense, as good it was, was not able to overcome that.

Are you defining alpha by points per game or value to the team

[One_and_Done]

The fact Kobe needed votes after the deadline to trigger a runoff, just to potentially grab the #13 spot, tells me in 3 years he's not even going to be top 15. Guys like KD, Giannis, Jokic, etc, will have added too much extra longevity by then for Kobe to be plausible that high.

[rk2023]

The fact Kobe needed votes after the deadline to trigger a runoff, just to potentially grab the #13 spot, tells me in 3 years he's not even going to be top 15. Guys like KD, Giannis, Jokic, etc, will have added too much extra longevity by then for Kobe to be plausible that high.

Perhaps if other tactical, ulterior motived voters emerge onto the PC Board and try to: (1) gate-keep deadlines that have been lax throughout the project (solely to obtain an outcome they have been rooting for instead of encouraging unbiased and good faith participation), (2) encourage / discourage people to vote or not vote for certain players under the guise of “modernism” and not having to vote/discuss amongst pioneer players , (3) and go about disingenuously spamming /100 and BBR stats to derail in general… that very well could happen.

[HeartBreakKid]

The fact Kobe needed votes after the deadline to trigger a runoff, just to potentially grab the #13 spot, tells me in 3 years he's not even going to be top 15. Guys like KD, Giannis, Jokic, etc, will have added too much extra longevity by then for Kobe to be plausible that high.

Could be, but maybe the voter pool will be different. There could also be a renaissance of updated opinion on Bryant as there are on many older players, including the one who is in a runoff with him.

[ceiling raiser]

The fact Kobe needed votes after the deadline to trigger a runoff, just to potentially grab the #13 spot, tells me in 3 years he's not even going to be top 15. Guys like KD, Giannis, Jokic, etc, will have added too much extra longevity by then for Kobe to be plausible that high.

Could be, but maybe the voter pool will be different. There could also be a renaissance of updated opinion on Bryant as there are on many older players, including the one who is in a runoff with him.

A lot of it is also a function of the nomination structure. I wouldn’t consider Bryant until the late teens in a vacuum, but I have to put him against head-to-head matchups. Which I actually greatly appreciate. It makes the arguments for nominations as important as the arguments for the main vote.

[Colbinii]

The fact Kobe needed votes after the deadline to trigger a runoff, just to potentially grab the #13 spot, tells me in 3 years he's not even going to be top 15. Guys like KD, Giannis, Jokic, etc, will have added too much extra longevity by then for Kobe to be plausible that high.

Could be, but maybe the voter pool will be different. There could also be a renaissance of updated opinion on Bryant as there are on many older players, including the one who is in a runoff with him.

A lot of it is also a function of the nomination structure. I wouldn’t consider Bryant until the late teens in a vacuum, but I have to put him against head-to-head matchups. Which I actually greatly appreciate. It makes the arguments for nominations as important as the arguments for the main vote.

Yes. The fact that there are only so many players we can vote for is a good thing--it becomes more of who is popular to get nominated--and then I need to choose between said players which ones I want to vote for.

For example, in the last thread I had Dirk ahead of everyone but voted Oscar since Dirk wasn't available.

This is going to be important as we work our way through the project.

[ceiling raiser]

Could be, but maybe the voter pool will be different. There could also be a renaissance of updated opinion on Bryant as there are on many older players, including the one who is in a runoff with him.

A lot of it is also a function of the nomination structure. I wouldn’t consider Bryant until the late teens in a vacuum, but I have to put him against head-to-head matchups. Which I actually greatly appreciate. It makes the arguments for nominations as important as the arguments for the main vote.

Yes. The fact that there are only so many players we can vote for is a good thing--it becomes more of who is popular to get nominated--and then I need to choose between said players which ones I want to vote for.

For example, in the last thread I had Dirk ahead of everyone but voted Oscar since Dirk wasn't available.

This is going to be important as we work our way through the project.

I actually think the impact has been better arguments for the actual nominees. Most of the gamesmanship has been around the nominations instead of the people voted in. Quality of the posting seems to be the best since the 2014 project IMO.

[Colbinii]

A lot of it is also a function of the nomination structure. I wouldn’t consider Bryant until the late teens in a vacuum, but I have to put him against head-to-head matchups. Which I actually greatly appreciate. It makes the arguments for nominations as important as the arguments for the main vote.

Yes. The fact that there are only so many players we can vote for is a good thing--it becomes more of who is popular to get nominated--and then I need to choose between said players which ones I want to vote for.

For example, in the last thread I had Dirk ahead of everyone but voted Oscar since Dirk wasn't available.

This is going to be important as we work our way through the project.

I actually think the impact has been better arguments for the actual nominees. Most of the gamesmanship has been around the nominations instead of the people voted in. Quality of the posting seems to be the best since the 2014 project IMO.

I went back and looked at voting from the 2000s projects. Lots of post with:

Vote: Player A
Backup: Player B

And that is it.

[One_and_Done]

A lot of it is also a function of the nomination structure. I wouldn’t consider Bryant until the late teens in a vacuum, but I have to put him against head-to-head matchups. Which I actually greatly appreciate. It makes the arguments for nominations as important as the arguments for the main vote.

Yes. The fact that there are only so many players we can vote for is a good thing--it becomes more of who is popular to get nominated--and then I need to choose between said players which ones I want to vote for.

For example, in the last thread I had Dirk ahead of everyone but voted Oscar since Dirk wasn't available.

This is going to be important as we work our way through the project.

I actually think the impact has been better arguments for the actual nominees. Most of the gamesmanship has been around the nominations instead of the people voted in. Quality of the posting seems to be the best since the 2014 project IMO.

I just look at it like this; what set of voters will be more likely to support modernist candidates after this thread? Ironically, it's mostly the ones voting for West. The few modernist voters who are voting Kobe will make their alternate vote someone sensible anyway, the rest will be voting for Mikan or Baylor or some other old timer from the Lakers next.

[Colbinii]

Yes. The fact that there are only so many players we can vote for is a good thing--it becomes more of who is popular to get nominated--and then I need to choose between said players which ones I want to vote for.

For example, in the last thread I had Dirk ahead of everyone but voted Oscar since Dirk wasn't available.

This is going to be important as we work our way through the project.

I actually think the impact has been better arguments for the actual nominees. Most of the gamesmanship has been around the nominations instead of the people voted in. Quality of the posting seems to be the best since the 2014 project IMO.

I just look at it like this; what set of voters will be more likely to support modernist candidates after this thread? Ironically, it's mostly the ones voting for West. The few modernist voters who are voting Kobe will make their alternate vote someone sensible anyway, the rest will be voting for Mikan or Baylor or some other old timer from the Lakers next.

Baylor isn't close to Mikan in anyones eyes.

[FJS]

Regarding the first bolded sentence—that’s not what happened.

Regarding the second bolded sentence—why is it not “right”? There were great reasons given for all.

Why?mmm let's see.

Magic played 9 finals in 13 years. Won 5 titles. Won 3 MVPS. He had a stacked team, but from 85 he was the best laker (and before that he was a key player). Do you think if KG was playing alongside Magic he would be playing the alpha role? or will be the excellent sidekick?
Bird 3 ring, 5 finals, 3 MVPs. He was the alpha since day 1. Do you think if KG was playing alongside Bird he would be the franchise player or he would be a McHale/Parrish kind of player?

Kg was good, of course, but he was not a capable #1 player. He was unable to raise his offensive production in playoffs. If you have a weak team you better improve your offensive production (look his FG%, really poor for a big man). He was not able to do it, and his deffense, as good it was, was not able to overcome that.

Are you defining alpha by points per game or value to the team

No. Magic was not the best scorer in his team all his carreer, even when Kaj was declining. But he was the franchise player.
KAJ, Wilkes, Worthy and even Scott were scoring more than him.

KG was a complete player, but when he went to a better team he suddenly drops in every area. As the main player his production and influence in all areas of the games are not traduced in wins.
You can put him as #9 saying... hey, he was really good as individual player. With a better supporting cast he would be better than multiple MVPs and winner of multiple rings. The fact is he did not.

He was 5 time top 5 in MVP votes (5 times! in 21 years career!) But is he top 9 of all time??? Really???
For example Karl Malone was 9 times top 5 (and another few top 10)

[OhayoKD]

Why?mmm let's see.

Magic played 9 finals in 13 years. Won 5 titles. Won 3 MVPS. He had a stacked team, but from 85 he was the best laker (and before that he was a key player). Do you think if KG was playing alongside Magic he would be playing the alpha role? or will be the excellent sidekick?
Bird 3 ring, 5 finals, 3 MVPs. He was the alpha since day 1. Do you think if KG was playing alongside Bird he would be the franchise player or he would be a McHale/Parrish kind of player?

Kg was good, of course, but he was not a capable #1 player. He was unable to raise his offensive production in playoffs. If you have a weak team you better improve your offensive production (look his FG%, really poor for a big man). He was not able to do it, and his deffense, as good it was, was not able to overcome that.

Are you defining alpha by points per game or value to the team

No. Magic was not the best scorer in his team all his carreer, even when Kaj was declining. But he was the franchise player.
KAJ, Wilkes, Worthy and even Scott were scoring more than him.

KG was a complete player, but when he went to a better team he suddenly drops in every area. As the main player his production and influence in all areas of the games are not traduced in wins.
[/quote][/quote]
Well no actually. His impact [b[improved[/b] on that better team from the year before despite moving in his 30's and having one healthy "Prime' year left.

I do not know what you mean by "traduced in wins". The team was much better with him than without in Minesotta, and it was still substantially better with than without in his 30's in Boston. That is not a hypthetical. That is what actually happened. That KG was less capable as a player because of what he did not do in situations he never played is a hypothetical assertion.

It's also curious you decided to focus on Jordan being too low as opposed to Russell with this mindset given the latter's accomplishments being far ahead of the former's.

KG was a worse offensive player than Magic. He was a better defensive player which is worth plenty. Just ask 11 ring Russell, 6 Ring Kareem, or 5 ring Duncan. Defensive anchors or two-way anchors are more successful than one-way ones. They are generally more valuable than one-way ones. KG looks no idfferent and paired also paired that with excellent sustained excellence despite suboptimal context for most of his prime.

[FJS]

Well no actually. His impact [b[improved[/b] on that better team from the year before despite moving in his 30's and having one healthy "Prime' year left.

I do not know what you mean by "traduced in wins". The team was much better with him than without in Minesotta, and it was still substantially better with than without in his 30's in Boston. That is not a hypthetical. That is what actually happened. That KG was less capable as a player because of what he did not do in situations he never played is a hypothetical assertion.

It's also curious you decided to focus on Jordan being too low as opposed to Russell with this mindset given the latter's accomplishments being far ahead of the former's.

KG was a worse offensive player than Magic. He was a better defensive player which is worth plenty. Just ask 11 ring Russell, 6 Ring Kareem, or 5 ring Duncan. Defensive anchors or two-way anchors are more successful than one-way ones. They are generally more valuable than one-way ones. KG looks no idfferent and paired also paired that with excellent sustained excellence despite suboptimal context for most of his prime.

I think that your team is better with you than without is the minimum you can ask to your franchise player or even to any star player in your team.
The thing is than Wolves with KG was a 1st round team at best for 12 years but 2004. So yeah, his team was better with him, but his defense, intangibles, playmake abilities etc traduced in fail to 1st round year after year, if not missing playoffs. I think it's not enough to be #9 of all time.
You can compare it with Russell, Kareem or Duncan... but 11,6 and 5 it's not the same thing than 1. Their defensive impact were there when it mattered. And don't forget Celtics in 08 needed 7 games vs Hawks (37-45 team) and Cavs (45-47 team) and no less than 6 games... it's not like they dominated. They deserved their title, but they suffered a lot.
Leonard has 2. It a fantastic defender, and better offensive weapon than KG (at least can score when needed). It doesn't make him top 10.

[Black Feet]

The fact Kobe needed votes after the deadline to trigger a runoff, just to potentially grab the #13 spot, tells me in 3 years he's not even going to be top 15. Guys like KD, Giannis, Jokic, etc, will have added too much extra longevity by then for Kobe to be plausible that high.

Could be, but maybe the voter pool will be different. There could also be a renaissance of updated opinion on Bryant as there are on many older players, including the one who is in a runoff with him.

Ya it’s no surprise really don’t know why he’s shocked Kobe is a very polarizing player always has been that’s not gonna change, I will say regardless of where he is now or in the near future it will be hard to match his resume.

[Ryoga Hibiki]

The fact Kobe needed votes after the deadline to trigger a runoff, just to potentially grab the #13 spot, tells me in 3 years he's not even going to be top 15. Guys like KD, Giannis, Jokic, etc, will have added too much extra longevity by then for Kobe to be plausible that high.

I suspect Jokic in 3 years, at 31 and after 11 NBA seasons, will dive into the top10.

[Ryoga Hibiki]

Anyway, I love this project and respect all the contributions, still I suspect KG is a bit overrated as we're in love with the idea of him too much.

[70sFan]

The fact Kobe needed votes after the deadline to trigger a runoff, just to potentially grab the #13 spot, tells me in 3 years he's not even going to be top 15. Guys like KD, Giannis, Jokic, etc, will have added too much extra longevity by then for Kobe to be plausible that high.

I suspect Jokic in 3 years, at 31 and after 11 NBA seasons, will dive into the top10.

Him vs Magic would be a nice discussion then, but I don't think it's a given I'd put him inside top 10, even assuming additional 3 years of 2023 level.

[Ryoga Hibiki]

The fact Kobe needed votes after the deadline to trigger a runoff, just to potentially grab the #13 spot, tells me in 3 years he's not even going to be top 15. Guys like KD, Giannis, Jokic, etc, will have added too much extra longevity by then for Kobe to be plausible that high.

I suspect Jokic in 3 years, at 31 and after 11 NBA seasons, will dive into the top10.

Him vs Magic would be a nice discussion then, but I don't think it's a given I'd put him inside top 10, even assuming additional 3 years of 2023 level.

he would of course need to prove it, but if he keeps the same level of dominance for the next 3 years I would start looking at him even in the top5

[70sFan]

I suspect Jokic in 3 years, at 31 and after 11 NBA seasons, will dive into the top10.

Him vs Magic would be a nice discussion then, but I don't think it's a given I'd put him inside top 10, even assuming additional 3 years of 2023 level.

he would of course need to prove it, but if he keeps the same level of dominance for the next 3 years I would start looking at him even in the top5

I don't consider his peak GOAT-level and his longevity would be still mediocre. Don't see the case for top 5 at all

[Ryoga Hibiki]

Him vs Magic would be a nice discussion then, but I don't think it's a given I'd put him inside top 10, even assuming additional 3 years of 2023 level.

he would of course need to prove it, but if he keeps the same level of dominance for the next 3 years I would start looking at him even in the top5

I don't consider his peak GOAT-level and his longevity would be still mediocre. Don't see the case for top 5 at all

I would consider such peak top3 and not necessarily 3rd.
In particular if he keeps this up for extra 3 years, that would be informing what he already did in the last 3 years as he would have to face different teams in the process.
And I value "long peak" more than longevity in my rankings