RealGM Top 100 List -- 2011

[shawngoat23]

I'm surprised I'm listed as a Bulls fan. I certainly grew up one, but after almost 4000 posts, I still haven't had a single post in the Chicago Bulls RealGM forum, so take it for what it's worth.

[SDChargers#1]

Has Kobe gotten any votes other than Unbiased? Not sure one counts as some . . . but yeah, looking at 5 of the top 10 if you count Wilt as a Laker. And all three of them forced their way out of smaller markets looking for the big money and bright lights, so basically they bought their way to greatness (other than Magic (luck) and, soon, Kobe and West). The Yankees of the NBA.

Does that make Boston the Dodgers of the NBA?

I have voted for Kobe as well

In my opinion when doing the ultimate, who is the greatest NBA franchise, comparison, it usually comes down to the vast top tier talent the Lakers have had (for me at least). All you have to do is go to Staples Center and see their retired jerseys...

Wilt
Kareem
Magic
West
Baylor
Goodrich
Worthy
soon to be Shaq
soon to be Kobe

The worst guy on that list is Gail Goodrich. It contains 5 of the top 10 players ever. Plus West who is top 15, Baylor who is top 25, Worthy who made the top 50 list (though I no longer believe him to be top 50), and Goodrich who is a Hall of Famer and multiple All Star.

That is just incredible and no team can come close to matching. In fact you can play the All Time Lakers Team vs All Time Everyone else and it would be a hard fought battle.

[Fencer reregistered]

It contains 5 of the top 10 players ever.

In some people's opinion.

As for the all-time team battle -- you're right, it's close.

C Shaq, Lakers-Wilt
PF Kareem, (Lakers-Wilt), Gasol
SF Baylor, Worthy
SG Kobe, West
PG Magic, (West)

doesn't beat

C Russell, Hakeem, many others
PF Duncan, (Hakeem), many others
SF Bird, many others
SG Jordan, many others
PG Many

But it's also not an embarrassing loss, although the gap widens if you let the other side have Philly-Wilt. (And if you disagree, that's probably fodder for another thread ...)

[SDChargers#1]

Depth is the all time teams greatest advantage. The starting lineups are very evenly matched, but then the All Time team has backups a level above the Lakers team (aside from center and SG or PG (wherever you decide to put West)).

As great as Worthy, Gasol, Goodrich are. They don't compare to the Lebron's, Garnett's, and Wade's of the world.

It certainly wouldn't be a sweep though, which I think it would be for any other team in the league.

[Laimbeer]

Has Kobe gotten any votes other than Unbiased? Not sure one counts as some . . . but yeah, looking at 5 of the top 10 if you count Wilt as a Laker. And all three of them forced their way out of smaller markets looking for the big money and bright lights, so basically they bought their way to greatness (other than Magic (luck) and, soon, Kobe and West). The Yankees of the NBA.

Does that make Boston the Dodgers of the NBA?

Am I mistaken, or did Magic do some manuvering to help ensure he went to the Lakers?

http://articles.latimes.com/1991-06-05/sports/sp-83_1_lakers

Magic Johnson would have returned to Michigan State rather than play for the Chicago Bulls.

"I'd have stayed in school," he said here Tuesday, standing alone outside Gate 3 1/2 of Chicago Stadium, the house that could have been his. "A coin toss changed the course of my whole life."

Johnson signed with the Lakers after his sophomore year of college and proceeded to win five championships. The Bulls picked second, took UCLA's David Greenwood and have won no championships.

"I wouldn't have played here," Johnson said on the eve of Game 2 of the NBA finals between his team and the team that could have been his. "The only reason I came out was to play with Kareem and the Lakers.

I thought I recalled something like that, and makes me consider Magic far less of a team builder than Duncan, Jordan, Bird, Isiah, etc.

[NO-KG-AI]

Swap Wilt and Magic, and thiswould be my exact list so far Glad to see you guys are all starting to listen

[cpower]

Wilt should have been higher for his abilities.

[ElGee]

Wilt should have been higher for his abilities.

How high should Derrick Coleman be? Danny Manning? What about Antoine Walker?

[Doctor MJ]

Wilt should have been higher for his abilities.

Agreed. It's a shame he didn't play better.

[penbeast0]

therealbig3 has been added as a voting member. He's been around the site for awhile, created some good discussion here, and fixed some of my faulty counts which I appreciate. Welcome aboard.

[therealbig3]

Cool, thanks!

I'm really looking forward to contributing and voting.

[penbeast0]

Adding colts18 to the voting panel. Just in time for the big fights from 11-20. Welcome.

[Gongxi]

Through #9, it seemed like there was a pretty strong consensus about that number and mostly everyone was just arguing about the arrangement of the deck chairs, so to speak. At that time, I was thinking that regardless of the merits of the idea of the 'Immortal Six' (poor idea because of the rigidity of it, but obviously awesome players that still fell within the top 6 this time around), it appeared as if an 'Epic Nine' or something was forming, with Shaq/Duncan/Hakeem rounding it out.

After Kobe won so decisively in the last thread, I'm not sure the idea of an Epic Nine is reflected in this project. I'm not a voting analysis type guy, so I wouldn't be able to strongly speculate, but if I counted correctly, Kobe did come away with a majority (as opposed to a plurality) of the votes. But did he receive more votes for #10 than he did for all of #1-9? Have any other players experienced such a huge swing thus far that would indicate the voters recognized a large gap like that?

Basically, I'm wondering if anyone else is getting the impression that it was the top 9 guys and then the project really just kicked off with the last thread, or if that's only my interpretation (because I do see such a gap in their actual play as basketball players), and if that is actually reflected in the voting.

[ElGee]

^^^I think Wilt Chamberlain was more misplaced than Kobe. So, there certainly was potential in the top-9...although in my research Karl Malone colors that top-9 idea a bit.

Although there is certainly the issue of different criteria being in play in this project. I thought today that the ultimate way to do a GOAT list might be to average all of the criteria (career, peak, ATL draft, versatility, 3-year run, etc.). This is my first attempt at a list and I find the fluidity of the thing more interesting the actual ordering...

So no, don't feel like it just started ITO of discussion/research/analysis being more important than the order of the top-9...yes feel like it just started ITO of the actual results being more stimulating to outsiders...especially those who hold antiquated ideas based on old box scores and narratives.

[Gongxi]

Yeah, there's two separate ideas there:

#1 That there is a top 9 much like there was a top 6 (although obviously they aren't exclusive to each other as the top 6 remain)

#2 That this was reflected in the voting

One is just an opinion-based thing, the other, I'm actually wondering if there are actual indications of it.

You say Malone colors your idea of a top 9: how close do you think Malone and Olajuwon (or whoever received your vote for 9) are?

[Doctor MJ]

Basically, I'm wondering if anyone else is getting the impression that it was the top 9 guys and then the project really just kicked off with the last thread, or if that's only my interpretation (because I do see such a gap in their actual play as basketball players), and if that is actually reflected in the voting.

I dunno. The consensus did show a clear top 9...but not only are those not my top 9, I consider the discussion of the most overrated of the bunch to be probably the best conversation we'll have in the whole project. So no, I would not look at it as if the project's just getting started, but you've got a point that now is when the chaos starts.

[mysticbb]

I somewhat agree with Gongxi here, and I think an IRV could have resulted into a different player for #10. I can understand the reasons for Chamberlain over Bird at #5, I can understand O'Neal over Duncan, but I have a hard time seeing Bryant over K. Malone or Erving for #10. The argument for Bryant is basically longevity and he gets beat out by both of those players. If we look at the boxscore metrics, we see Malone and Erving slightly ahead, and we know that Bryant didn't have such big defensive impact as a small (even though some are trying to argue like that). Malone had easily the bigger defensive impact even though he wasn't a defensive anchor. And we also know that Erving basically got the same stories about his defensive plays as Bryant in his best days, while Erving at least can back that up with his defensive numbers, Bryant can't. So, there isn't a consistent argument for Bryant being indeed the better player, but rather having more team accolades (not individual accolades, btw, Erving could have won the MVP award in 1975 and 1976 over McAdoo and Abdul-Jabbar too!).

I agree with the Top9 albeit not with the order completely, Bryant would have been my #12, slightly ahead of Garnett at #13. The next two should be Karl Malone and Julius Erving, but I have the feeling some will vote for guys like Jerry West and Oscar Robertson. What we see for Malone, Garnett, West, Erving and Robertson are basically equal stats for the first 14 seasons, after that we are getting more from Malone, Erving and Garnett, no more from West and Robertson. So, how much more is the defensive impact of Garnett worth? And how much more is the huge longevity edge for Malone worth?

[An Unbiased Fan]

I would say the Top 10 players for RealGMers has stayed very consistent over the last couple years. The vast majority of Top 10 lists I have seen on the PC Board inlcude the same 10 guys, just in various orders. The Top 10 nominations to start the project also refelcts this. So there seems to be a solid general consensus. From #11-beyond, I think voting will become a bit more fragmented. The PF cluster coming up, and the PG cluster in the far distance both will likely yield a wide spectrum of views, and no clear majority on ballots.

[Gongxi]

Right, what I'm saying, though, is it's the top 9 in the project that seemed to be pretty solidified, and once we got to 10 is where things got sketchy. It seems like 10-16 or so could go in virtually any order, but- at this point- none of those guys are a serious danger for 1-9.

Just like it used to be 1-6. Or, rather, an extension of that.

[Laimbeer]

Bird blew out Shaq for 6, so there's still a healthy gap there.