BRs Top 100 list but separated by position.

[mdonnelly1989]

Point Guard


1. Magic Johnson
2. Stephen Curry
3. Oscar Robertson
4. Jerry West
5. Isiah Thomas
6. John Stockton
7. Chris Paul
8. Jason Kidd
9. Steve Nash
10. James Harden
11. Bob Cousy
12. Walt Frazier
13. Russell Westbrook
14. Gary Payton
15. Luka Dončić
16. Damian Lillard
17. Kyrie Irving
18. Nate Archibald
19. Tony Parker
20. Chauncey Billups
21. Lenny Wilkens
22. Dave Bing

Shooting Guard.

1. Michael Jordan
2. Kobe Bryant
3. Jerry West
4. Dwyane Wade
5. James Harden
6. Allen Iverson
7. Clyde Drexler
8. George Gervin
9. Ray Allen
10. Reggie Miller
11. Tracy McGrady
12. Vince Carter
13. Hal Greer
14. Manu Ginóbili
15. Pete Maravich
16. Earl Monroe
17. Sam Jones
18. Bill Sharman
19. Joe Dumars
20. Klay Thompson

Small Forwards

1. LeBron James
2. Larry Bird
3. Kevin Durant
4. Julius Erving
5. Elgin Baylor
6. Scottie Pippen
7. John Havlicek
8. Kawhi Leonard
9. Rick Barry
10. Paul Pierce
11. Dominique Wilkins
12. Carmelo Anthony
13. James Worthy
14. Paul Arizin
15. Alex English
16. Paul George
17. Grant Hill
18. Jimmy Butler
19. Adrian Dantley
20. Jayson Tatum

Power Forward

1. Tim Duncan
2. Kevin Garnett
3. Dirk Nowitzki
4. Giannis Antetokounmpo
5. Charles Barkley
6. Karl Malone
7. Bob Pettit
8. Elvin Hayes
9. Chris Bosh
10. Dave Cowens
11. Chris Webber
12. Dave DeBusschere


Center

1. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
2. Bill Russell
3. Shaquille O'Neal
4. Wilt Chamberlain
5. Hakeem Olajuwon
6. Nikola Jokić
7. David Robinson
8. Moses Malone
9. Patrick Ewing
10. George Mikan
11. Anthony Davis
12. Kevin McHale
13. Robert Parish
14. Wes Unseld
15. Bill Walton
16. Dolph Schayes
17. Bob McAdoo
18. Pau Gasol
19. Dikembe Mutombo
20. Bob Lanier
21. Alonzo Mourning
22. Artis Gilmore

[zimpy27]

Pretty good honestly.

Impressed

[Myth]

My gripes with the list are relatively minor. Honestly one of the better lists I’ve seen.

[Doctor MJ]

So, this is better than mainstream lists typically are, but big picture, they aren’t paying people to go become historical basketball experts, so the improvement is probably coming by the ability of put upon writer/voters to go look at other historical lists…such as what has been done on these boards for 20 plus years.

Not sure if these guys are using RealGM historical stuff directly of course - we’re probably less known now than we used to be - but I do think this is the sort of thing that’s gradually allowing for better historical lists.

I’d point the concept of “anchoring” where people have a tendency to keep guys basically in a vague tier based on what they encountered when they were first introduced to these guys.

Consider someone like Pete Maravich. Why is he still on anyone’s Top 100 list? Why is he on it when, say, Sweet Lou Hudson is nowhere to be found when we know that Hudson led an elite offense before Maravich got there, and the franchise completely through that away to try to improve ticket sales by just handing the ball to the Great White Hope?

Now, listen, I don’t think Hudson should be the Top 100 either (he might have, if he played for an owner who cared more about winning, but it is what it is), just saying, I don’t think these voters actually know the stuff I’m saying “we know”. They are probably largely ignorant on those details, and have Maravich on the list because traditionally, that was the story. That Maravich was a mega-talent who just happened to always be with horrible teammates, instead of someone who developed a lot of showy habits that just didn’t scale that well against NBA level competition.

There’s also the telltale Dave Bing listing. Why does Bing makes lists like this? Well, I would say in part because he was so successful in business and politics after he retired. I would suggest this helped him make the NBA 50, which then led to automatic inclusion in the NBA 75 when they completely killed the meaningful tradition of such lists, and then led to Bleacher Report voters saying “Well, he’s in the official list so I should probably have him on mind somewhere.” And no, they shouldn’t.

But that’s just me being persnickety. I hate the NBA 75 with the passion of a thousand suns, but these guys are doing their best using the sources they look to triangulate against. Could be worse.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[NZB2323]

Isiah Thomas remains eternally overrated. Dude averaged 18, 8, and 4, 48.1 TS%, 18.6 PER when he won his first championship.

[2020]

Is Bosh really better than Chris Webber?

Klay Thompson over SGA?

Begs to question if Player A (only plays one year but averages 50/20/20 for 82 games and wins the championship) is better than Player B (plays for 20 years averaging 25/10/10 without a championship ring).

I think player A is a better player. No?

[mastermixer]

They have Jerry West on there as both a PG and a SG

[Lenneth]

Missing a few players on PF? I see a total of 96 players.

[JM00n69]

That PF list being just 12 players and missing some absolute units is criminal

[JM00n69]

Also Giannis over Barkley is a joke. I get KG and Dirk due to having a ring but even then Charles has a case for nr2

[LuDux1]

Missing a few players on PF? I see a total of 96 players.

Also Jerry West appears twice

[Anticon]

The fact that we got to see all of the top 3 PFs play in the 2000s in the same conference was wild.

I suspect lots of reasonable debate over spots 2 to 6 on the center list.

[-Luke-]

They have Jerry West on there as both a PG and a SG

Now I wonder whether PG Jerry West or SG Jerry West is higher on the top 100 list.

[SpreeS]

West/Harden both mentioned twise

Cowens is a C
Davis/Gasol/McHale could be more PF
Sheed/Green/Rodman are TOP100 material
Reed/Wallace are TOP100 material too

[Jables]

Also Giannis over Barkley is a joke. I get KG and Dirk due to having a ring but even then Charles has a case for nr2

I mean the more objective a top 100 list becomes, the more context is being missed. I guarantee everyone talking about ringz culture being too much is going to point towards Giannis better defense as being the reason he has a ring and Barkley doesn't. The offensive gap is only massive if you take into account the different eras. Really it's just tough to compare them.

[PicPock]

Also Giannis over Barkley is a joke. I get KG and Dirk due to having a ring but even then Charles has a case for nr2

From 21 to 30yo

come picture

Definitely a joke, i don't get it too.

[Marrs-Law]

Tangent rant: It would be fun to see an original list. Lebron over Jordan; Bird over Magic; KG over Duncan, for example? Like Kobe? Argue for top three. Think he's an overrated chucker? Put him 19 and tell me why. Think the 60s and 70s were weak compared to today? Tell me why Kareem isn't top three and why Russell and Wilt are outside the top 20. Or go the other way and tell me why George Milkan is better than Allen Iverson. I'd really love to see a list where someone has their principles (rings matter, don't matter, longevity matters doesn't matter, era matters doesn't matter) and stick with it. Give me a good argument and I'd love to read it.

[cupcakesnake]

So, this is better than mainstream lists typically are, but big picture, they aren’t paying people to go become historical basketball experts, so the improvement is probably coming by the ability of put upon writer/voters to go look at other historical lists…such as what has been done on these boards for 20 plus years.

That's the same way I feel about most of these lists, good or bad. A panel of guys who work for a site, many of who are- at best- casual NBA history fans, get assigned to do a top 100. They all vote. Some of their lists are probably pretty well researched, but there's at least a few guys going completely off subjective opinions on tons of players they have never gone deep on.

I want to read an actual criteria these guys are instructed to work off of, so I even know what they're trying to figure out together. They list a short paragraph mentioning total career value, but then put Magic top 5, so it seems like maybe there is no criteria, this is just a group of 8 people going off vibes.

There’s also the telltale Dave Bing listing. Why does Bing makes lists like this? Well, I would say in part because he was so successful in business and politics after he retired. I would suggest this helped him make the NBA 50, which then led to automatic inclusion in the NBA 75 when they completely killed the meaningful tradition of such lists, and then led to Bleacher Report voters saying “Well, he’s in the official list so I should probably have him on mind somewhere.” And no, they shouldn’t.

I was going to browse the list before bed last night, but got to David Bing right away and felt: nahhh I'm good.

But that’s just me being persnickety. I hate the NBA 75 with the passion of a thousand suns, but these guys are doing their best using the sources they look to triangulate against. Could be worse.

Absolutely could be worse.

[Sofia]

buh buh but Steph Curry is not a point guard

[JujitsuFlip]

They have Jerry West on there as both a PG and a SG

Harden too.