Top 50 player seasons, PLEASE READ pg 4 if you want to vote

[C-izMe]

Kobe is hard but I go with his MVP year. He actually tried on defense and had his best playoffs (even though he fell short to a way better team).

I go with Barkley's MVP year for the same reason (he actually played defense!!!).

Lebron playing like crap against Boston combined with his amazing dominance against Orlando makes the decision pretty obvious to me. Regular seasons are very close but in 2010 Lebron let his team down. In 2009 they let him down.

[JordansBulls]

If we are doing this I think starting with which year is Kareem's best would be a good start. He had years where he carried deadweight to the playoffs but other years where he won titles with other great players. We also need to establish Oscar's best year. I say 65 or 62 but it's close.

Kareem: would have to be 1976, for me. Look at that Laker team, LOOK at it. It's worse than KG's Minny teams. And he still managed to carry them to just about .500 by averaging 27.7 PPG, 16.9 RPG, 5.0 PG and 4.1 BPG. This was after the pace dropped, so the numbers are not at all inflated. He himself said that '76 was his best season, his team just sucked. His all-around peak. Other contenders are '80 and '72.

Oscar, it would probably be '64. Highest PER, shot 58% TS, and the Royals had an ORtg that was by far the highest in the league, all because of Oscar. People love to look at '62 because it was the triple double year, but in '64 he fell seven total rebounds short, so yeah, he was still a triple-double monster back then.

Other players who's best years I would be interested in hearing opinions on are Jordan, Russell, and LeBron (09 vs. 10).

What??? 1976 Kareem ain't better than 1971 Kareem.

[ardee]

If we are doing this I think starting with which year is Kareem's best would be a good start. He had years where he carried deadweight to the playoffs but other years where he won titles with other great players. We also need to establish Oscar's best year. I say 65 or 62 but it's close.

Kareem: would have to be 1976, for me. Look at that Laker team, LOOK at it. It's worse than KG's Minny teams. And he still managed to carry them to just about .500 by averaging 27.7 PPG, 16.9 RPG, 5.0 PG and 4.1 BPG. This was after the pace dropped, so the numbers are not at all inflated. He himself said that '76 was his best season, his team just sucked. His all-around peak. Other contenders are '80 and '72.

Oscar, it would probably be '64. Highest PER, shot 58% TS, and the Royals had an ORtg that was by far the highest in the league, all because of Oscar. People love to look at '62 because it was the triple double year, but in '64 he fell seven total rebounds short, so yeah, he was still a triple-double monster back then.

Other players who's best years I would be interested in hearing opinions on are Jordan, Russell, and LeBron (09 vs. 10).

What??? 1976 Kareem ain't better than 1971 Kareem.

Adjust for pace, and in 76 his stats go up to 29/18. More rebounding, more assists, and better defense. The 3 extra PPG is down to having arguably the second greatest playmaker ever setting him up.

Tell me, would you consider Jordan's '87 season (his second season in the NBA where he was healthy), better than his '92 season (his seventh season in the NBA where he was healthy?). He scored more in '87 but was obviously more well-rounded and a smarter player in '92.

Similarly, Kareem's raw numbers were better in his second season, but was a far better player in his seventh season. Switch '71 and '76 Kareem, the Bucks get better defensively and arguably hit 70 wins. With '71 Kareem, the Lakers would not be able to get stops at all. Not that '71 Kareem was a bad defender, he was just elite in '76. They probably win 30-32 games.

[wallyb]

If we are doing this I think starting with which year is Kareem's best would be a good start. He had years where he carried deadweight to the playoffs but other years where he won titles with other great players. We also need to establish Oscar's best year. I say 65 or 62 but it's close.

Kareem: would have to be 1976, for me. Look at that Laker team, LOOK at it. It's worse than KG's Minny teams. And he still managed to carry them to just about .500 by averaging 27.7 PPG, 16.9 RPG, 5.0 PG and 4.1 BPG. This was after the pace dropped, so the numbers are not at all inflated. He himself said that '76 was his best season, his team just sucked. His all-around peak. Other contenders are '80 and '72.

Oscar, it would probably be '64. Highest PER, shot 58% TS, and the Royals had an ORtg that was by far the highest in the league, all because of Oscar. People love to look at '62 because it was the triple double year, but in '64 he fell seven total rebounds short, so yeah, he was still a triple-double monster back then.

Other players who's best years I would be interested in hearing opinions on are Jordan, Russell, and LeBron (09 vs. 10).

What??? 1976 Kareem ain't better than 1971 Kareem.

You keep saying that. WS and WS/48 have their value, but they certainly don't tell the whole story. Kareem was unquestionably better in '76-77 than he was in '71-72. Anyone who saw him well tell you that and Kareem said so himself. Noticeably better defender, more range, versatility and counter moves on offense and getting to near elite level basketball intelligence-wise. He was pretty much as manuverable and athletic in '76-77 as he was in '71-72, but 20 lbs heavier and stronger. Kareem in his 1st 2 Laker years played with garbage compared to having an elite PG and good wing players in Milwaukee. He had to adjust his game to help the much weaker LA teams out and the league also started packing it in and forcing him to deal with more double/triple teamming than he did his early Buck years. Combine that with a little slower pace and fewer minutes and yeah, his #s are gonna drop some. But he was a better player. Those '76-77 LA teams don't win 20 without him and with him they won 40 and freakin' 53 and with his already weak team banged up he turned in his most dominant playoff performance in '77. 1976 and 1977 was Jabbar at his absolute peak. I'd say 1980, 1974 and 1971 would be his next best years in some order.

[JordansBulls]

Adjust for pace, and in 76 his stats go up to 29/18. More rebounding, more assists, and better defense. The 3 extra PPG is down to having arguably the second greatest playmaker ever setting him up.

Tell me, would you consider Jordan's '87 season (his second season in the NBA where he was healthy), better than his '92 season (his seventh season in the NBA where he was healthy?). He scored more in '87 but was obviously more well-rounded and a smarter player in '92.

Similarly, Kareem's raw numbers were better in his second season, but was a far better player in his seventh season. Switch '71 and '76 Kareem, the Bucks get better defensively and arguably hit 70 wins. With '71 Kareem, the Lakers would not be able to get stops at all. Not that '71 Kareem was a bad defender, he was just elite in '76. They probably win 30-32 games.

What do you mean adjust for pace? One guy had much better overall stats in 1971 than 1976 and even went much further in the playoffs. The other guy didn't even make the playoffs and you want him to be used as his best season all time?
If it was his best season all time then he should have been good enough to get the team in the playoffs right in the 70's.
And no I'm not going to consider Jordan's best season a year when he was an 8th seed vs a year he was a #1 seed and had the best numbers in the league still.
Only some people would think Jordan in 1987 was his best season simply because they are only looking at PPG.

[JordansBulls]

You keep saying that. WS and WS/48 have their value, but they certainly don't tell the whole story. Kareem was unquestionably better in '76-77 than he was in '71-72. Anyone who saw him well tell you that and Kareem said so himself. Noticeably better defender, more range, versatility and counter moves on offense and getting to near elite level basketball intelligence-wise. He was pretty much as manuverable and athletic in '76-77 as he was in '71-72, but 20 lbs heavier and stronger. Kareem in his 1st 2 Laker years played with garbage compared to having an elite PG and good wing players in Milwaukee. He had to adjust his game to help the much weaker LA teams out and the league also started packing it in and forcing him to deal with more double/triple teamming than he did his early Buck years. Combine that with a little slower pace and fewer minutes and yeah, his #s are gonna drop some. But he was a better player. Those '76-77 LA teams don't win 20 without him and with him they won 40 and freakin' 53 and with his already weak team banged up he turned in his most dominant playoff performance in '77. 1976 and 1977 was Jabbar at his absolute peak. I'd say 1980, 1974 and 1971 would be his next best years in some order.

Except here it says we are using the best seasons and 1976 nor 1977 Kareem had the best seasons over 1971 or 1972 Kareem. There is no way a guy who had better overall numbers and better stats and more success in 1971 season is worse than a guy who didn't make the playoffs in 1976 or who lost with HCA in 1977 in a sweep.

[C-izMe]

One had nobody on his team that played over 1000 minutes shoot over a 50.6TS (or anybody overall that shot at least 52TS) or play defense at all. The other had the second greatest PG ever and at least 5 players better than Kareem's next best in 76. Comparing team success isn't the way to even this comparison.

[wallyb]

You keep saying that. WS and WS/48 have their value, but they certainly don't tell the whole story. Kareem was unquestionably better in '76-77 than he was in '71-72. Anyone who saw him well tell you that and Kareem said so himself. Noticeably better defender, more range, versatility and counter moves on offense and getting to near elite level basketball intelligence-wise. He was pretty much as manuverable and athletic in '76-77 as he was in '71-72, but 20 lbs heavier and stronger. Kareem in his 1st 2 Laker years played with garbage compared to having an elite PG and good wing players in Milwaukee. He had to adjust his game to help the much weaker LA teams out and the league also started packing it in and forcing him to deal with more double/triple teamming than he did his early Buck years. Combine that with a little slower pace and fewer minutes and yeah, his #s are gonna drop some. But he was a better player. Those '76-77 LA teams don't win 20 without him and with him they won 40 and freakin' 53 and with his already weak team banged up he turned in his most dominant playoff performance in '77. 1976 and 1977 was Jabbar at his absolute peak. I'd say 1980, 1974 and 1971 would be his next best years in some order.

Except here it says we are using the best seasons and 1976 nor 1977 Kareem had the best seasons over 1971 or 1972 Kareem. There is no way a guy who had better overall numbers and better stats and more success in 1971 season is worse than a guy who didn't make the playoffs in 1976 or who lost with HCA in 1977 in a sweep.

You're obsessed with numbers and not really grasping at what context they're produced. Kareem still had awesome numbers in 1976 and 1977. He did it playing styles that limited his individual production a bit compared to how he was used in Milwaukee - Bill Sharman and Jerry West have admitted to this. Kareem also played 4-5 fewer mpg in '76-77 compared to '71-72. He also played against a lot more help D than he faced in 1971 and 1972. He also didn't have the benefit of a great playmaker and talented overall supporting cast in '76-77 compared to Oscar, Dandridge and company. Jabbar's #s were a bit inflated in '71-72. Give him the same supporting cast in '76-77 that he had in '71-72 and he'd have better #s than he did in '71-72 and even more team success as '76 or '77 Jabbar probably leads Milwaukee past the '72 Lakers even with Oscar hurt and gets them another title. And what's more impressive - rolling with a great team or carrying a horrid team well beyond what it'd accomplish otherwise? LA seriously would not reach 20 wins and would've been the worst team in the league in 1976 or 1977 if it weren't for Kareem and with him they win 40 and 53 those years. That 53-win team was weaker than the 1988 Bulls - it was probably the weakest 50-win team ever. Then Jabbar has a monster playoff in '77 - about as dominant as you can get.

You're also obssessed with this HCA stuff. You do realize it meant absolutely nothing regarding LA and Portland in '77? Portland was a MUCH BETTER team than LA that year when healthy. You know that if you'd been paying attention. Walton missed 17 games and Portland under performed without him while Kareem carried LA well above what it should've accomplished. Portland should've finished 10-15 games ahead of LA. Then LA had its 2nd and 3rd most valuable players injured in the playoffs with Kermit Washington - they're only other rebounder and defender besided Kareem - not available and Lucius Allen - they're only ballhandler and No. 3 scorer - missing 4 games and playing about 5 more not near 100 pct due to a foot injury. Portland should have swept LA that year, HCA or not. They were much stronger. Kareem beat GS practically by himself in 7 games putting up monster #s despite constant double and triple teams and sagging D by GS all series and no help from his teammates. He then outduals Walton - an elite center - by nearly the same statistical margin as Hakeem did DRob in '95 despite Walton receiving way more help D from Mo Lucas than DRob ever did from Rodman. But again no help for Jabbar at all. LA lost because Portland had vastly superior play from the backcourt and SF plus Lucas had a mismatch at the 4 for the Blazers.

Jabbar himself said '76 was his best season and he was right at that level again in '77 while guiding a horrid team to 53 wins and having a monster playoff run so I see nothing wrong with picking either of those as his best season. You could also make a good case for either 1980 or 1974, which many say was his best year as a Buck with how well he played overall despite Oscar fading, over 1971 and 1972. Numbers don't tell the whole story. Jabbar was better from '74-80 than he was in '71-72 and he had pretty awesome regular season plus post season runs in '74, '77 and '80.

[JordansBulls]

One had nobody on his team that played over 1000 minutes shoot over a 50.6TS (or anybody overall that shot at least 52TS) or play defense at all. The other had the second greatest PG ever and at least 5 players better than Kareem's next best in 76. Comparing team success isn't the way to even this comparison.

When comparing top 50 seasons Kareem's 1971 season blows out his 1976, not to mention was an unianamous choice for best player in 1971.

[ardee]

One had nobody on his team that played over 1000 minutes shoot over a 50.6TS (or anybody overall that shot at least 52TS) or play defense at all. The other had the second greatest PG ever and at least 5 players better than Kareem's next best in 76. Comparing team success isn't the way to even this comparison.

When comparing top 50 seasons Kareem's 1971 season blows out his 1976, not to mention was an unianamous choice for best player in 1971.

What the....... Are you even reading? Wallyb just put up a very logical and well put together line of reasoning as to why Kareem was better in 76 and 77, and you're just stonewalling and refusing to accept it without even a reasoning of your own?

Kareem's TEAM had more wins in 71, because he had the no. 2 all time PG and fantastic role players like Dandridge, as compared to Kermit freaking Washington and Mo Lucas in 76. Not to mention 72 Kareem got shut down by an aging Chamberlain, while 77 Kareem absolutely tore apart Bill Walton in his prime.

On another note, would like to know someone's opinion on Jordan's five best seasons in order.

[C-izMe]

Jordan 91
Jordan 90
Jordan 88
Jordan 96
Jordan ???

I'll probably edit explanations into this and revise it later but this is the list as of now.

[JordansBulls]

One had nobody on his team that played over 1000 minutes shoot over a 50.6TS (or anybody overall that shot at least 52TS) or play defense at all. The other had the second greatest PG ever and at least 5 players better than Kareem's next best in 76. Comparing team success isn't the way to even this comparison.

When comparing top 50 seasons Kareem's 1971 season blows out his 1976, not to mention was an unianamous choice for best player in 1971.

What the....... Are you even reading? Wallyb just put up a very logical and well put together line of reasoning as to why Kareem was better in 76 and 77, and you're just stonewalling and refusing to accept it without even a reasoning of your own?

Kareem's TEAM had more wins in 71, because he had the no. 2 all time PG and fantastic role players like Dandridge, as compared to Kermit freaking Washington and Mo Lucas in 76. Not to mention 72 Kareem got shut down by an aging Chamberlain, while 77 Kareem absolutely tore apart Bill Walton in his prime.

On another note, would like to know someone's opinion on Jordan's five best seasons in order.

And Kareem also produced more as a player those seasons in 1971 and 1972 and went further in the playoffs. So when you produce more and go further your season is simply better period.

[wallyb]

And Kareem also produced more as a player those seasons in 1971 and 1972 and went further in the playoffs. So when you produce more and go further your season is simply better period.

[/quote]

Are you paying attention at all? We've outlined pretty clearly why Kareem produced more in '71-72 than '76-77. His vasty superior surrounding talent - led by an all-time great playmaker - combined with playing against far less help defense, opened things up for him more and he was used in a way that maximized his production compared to having to alter his game a little to help weaker teams.

Viewed in proper context Jabbar's #s were more impressive in '76-77 and he was a far better player than he was in '71-72. Yeah, winning 66 games and going on a title run with great playoff numbers in '71 is very impressive. But I don't think it's as impressive as carrying a team that wouldn't win 20 games without him to 53 wins - dominating against a lot more help D - and then turning in a GOAT-level playoff performance like Kareem did in '77 by averaging 35-18-4-4 on 61 pct shooting with zero help from his banged-up team against rookie Parish and Clifford Ray and then peak Walton and Mo Lucas.

Heck I think Kareem's performance in '74, not '71, was his best as a Buck. His #s drop a little from 71-73 because Oscar's on his last legs, the team's declining and help defenses pick up more, but he was a superior overall player who added 10 lbs and got stronger, really started tp focus more on D and started to add versatility and range to his offensive game. He kept a fading, banged up team near 60 wins and then turned in his most dominant Buck playoff run - averaging 33-16-5 on 56 pct shooting - and falling just 1 win shy of the title thanks to poor play by Oscar and Dandridge in the finals, some poor coaching by Costello, shady reffing and most of all a key injury to Lucius Allen that would've made all the difference.

You could also make a case that '80 was a better season for Kareem than '71. He didn't have the youthful legs to be as dominant as he was in his Buck years or '76-77, but he was probably at his apex as a complete player in '80 and he turned in a monster playoff run that led to a championship - robbed of finals MVP because of a knee-jerk reaction to Magic's fabulous game 6.

[ardee]

And Kareem also produced more as a player those seasons in 1971 and 1972 and went further in the playoffs. So when you produce more and go further your season is simply better period.

Are you paying attention at all? We've outlined pretty clearly why Kareem produced more in '71-72 than '76-77. His vasty superior surrounding talent - led by an all-time great playmaker - combined with playing against far less help defense, opened things up for him more and he was used in a way that maximized his production compared to having to alter his game a little to help weaker teams.

Viewed in proper context Jabbar's #s were more impressive in '76-77 and he was a far better player than he was in '71-72. Yeah, winning 66 games and going on a title run with great playoff numbers in '71 is very impressive. But I don't think it's as impressive as carrying a team that wouldn't win 20 games without him to 53 wins - dominating against a lot more help D - and then turning in a GOAT-level playoff performance like Kareem did in '77 by averaging 35-18-4-4 on 61 pct shooting with zero help from his banged-up team against rookie Parish and Clifford Ray and then peak Walton and Mo Lucas.

Heck I think Kareem's performance in '74, not '71, was his best as a Buck. His #s drop a little from 71-73 because Oscar's on his last legs, the team's declining and help defenses pick up more, but he was a superior overall player who added 10 lbs and got stronger, really started tp focus more on D and started to add versatility and range to his offensive game. He kept a fading, banged up team near 60 wins and then turned in his most dominant Buck playoff run - averaging 33-16-5 on 56 pct shooting - and falling just 1 win shy of the title thanks to poor play by Oscar and Dandridge in the finals, some poor coaching by Costello, shady reffing and most of all a key injury to Lucius Allen that would've made all the difference.

You could also make a case that '80 was a better season for Kareem than '71. He didn't have the youthful legs to be as dominant as he was in his Buck years or '76-77, but he was probably at his apex as a complete player in '80 and he turned in a monster playoff run that led to a championship - robbed of finals MVP because of a knee-jerk reaction to Magic's fabulous game 6.[/quote]

Guy's not even acknowledging what we're saying. I think he's trolling.

[JordansBulls]

Look, I understand what you are saying, however there is absolutely no way carrying a team that you think would be a 20-25 win team to 50 wins is more impressive than actually taking an organization that never won before to a title having the best numbers in the league by far and winning virtually accolade there is that season. A guy is not going to have one of the greatest seasons ever (top 10 or so) getting swept in a series or not even making the playoffs when he has other seasons statistically better and had more success.

[GrangerDanger]

Look, I understand what you are saying, however there is absolutely no way carrying a team that you think would be a 20-25 win team to 50 wins is more impressive than actually taking an organization that never won before to a title having the best numbers in the league by far and winning virtually accolade there is that season. A guy is not going to have one of the greatest seasons ever (top 10 or so) getting swept in a series or not even making the playoffs when he has other seasons statistically better and had more success.

^^
This is exactly what I'm talking about. This is the nonstop trolling and bizarre logic I was trying to warn you about

[JordansBulls]

Look, I understand what you are saying, however there is absolutely no way carrying a team that you think would be a 20-25 win team to 50 wins is more impressive than actually taking an organization that never won before to a title having the best numbers in the league by far and winning virtually accolade there is that season. A guy is not going to have one of the greatest seasons ever (top 10 or so) getting swept in a series or not even making the playoffs when he has other seasons statistically better and had more success.

^^
This is exactly what I'm talking about. This is the nonstop trolling and bizarre logic I was trying to warn you about

WTH are you talking about? I proved why his 1971 SEASON was greater than his 1976 Season or 1977 SEASON.

We are talking about SEASONS here.

We are not talking hypotheticals here about if Kareem had a legit #2 in 1976 or 1977 that he would have fared better. We are talking about and comparing what actually happened and the actual results statistically and success wise. And that is why I say his 1971 season is greater.

It would be like trying to justify saying Wilt's 1962 season is greater than his 1967 because he had better overall stats but was just missing a #2 guy and lost to a superior team in the Celtics that year vs actually winning it all in 1967 with just as good of numbers.

[ardee]

Look, I understand what you are saying, however there is absolutely no way carrying a team that you think would be a 20-25 win team to 50 wins is more impressive than actually taking an organization that never won before to a title having the best numbers in the league by far and winning virtually accolade there is that season. A guy is not going to have one of the greatest seasons ever (top 10 or so) getting swept in a series or not even making the playoffs when he has other seasons statistically better and had more success.

^^
This is exactly what I'm talking about. This is the nonstop trolling and bizarre logic I was trying to warn you about

WTH are you talking about? I proved why his 1971 SEASON was greater than his 1976 Season or 1977 SEASON.

We are talking about SEASONS here.

We are not talking hypotheticals here about if Kareem had a legit #2 in 1976 or 1977 that he would have fared better. We are talking about and comparing what actually happened and the actual results statistically and success wise. And that is why I say his 1971 season is greater.

We are talking about how GOOD OF A PLAYER a player was in one of these seasons. And Kareem was a better player in 1976 than in 1971. His averages were better across the board except for PPG, and that too with a lower pace.

If you want to go by merely success and accolades, does Willis Reed 1970 (MVP, finals MVP), get a high placement from you?

[JordansBulls]

Again, I'm not saying Kareem gets it because he won league and finals mvp. I'm saying it is his best because not only was his advanced stats better but he also had his most success as well. Willis Reed really doesn't compare here because his stats were not anywhere near close to the best in the league. You need to have both, the numbers and the success.

And again the reason you say his numbers were better across the board is that you are looking at raw numbers. Just like looking at Wilt's 1962 season over his 1967 is going to be misleading because of looking at raw numbers.

Let's see what most others believe is Kareem's best season.

[wallyb]

Again, I'm not saying Kareem gets it because he won league and finals mvp. I'm saying it is his best because not only was his advanced stats better but he also had his most success as well. Willis Reed really doesn't compare here because his stats were not anywhere near close to the best in the league. You need to have both, the numbers and the success.

And again the reason you say his numbers were better across the board is that you are looking at raw numbers. Just like looking at Wilt's 1962 season over his 1967 is going to be misleading because of looking at raw numbers.

Let's see what most others believe is Kareem's best season.

Well advanced stats have their flaws too. They are very nice, but they don't tell the whole story. You can't just go by win shares or PER. You have to put them in context. Kareem had great advanced stats in '76-77 too. Something tells me if his '71-72 Bucks' supporting casts were transported to those LA teams Kareem's advanced stats would be even better than what he put up in '71-72. And he'd have 2 rings instead of 1. Look at Jabbar's '74 and '77 playoff runs - better than '71 and way better than '72. What do say about that? How about 1980 too? He also won a title that year. And there is something to be said about taking 20 wins-or less bad teams to 40 and even 53 wins like Kareem did in '76-77. Kareem was great in his young '71-72 years, but he was flat better from '74-80, with '74, '76-77 and '80 being his top years in that stretch. I can understand picking '71 over '76 on the basis there was no playoff run in '76 to measure against, but I have a very hard time putting Jabbar's '71 season over '74, '77 and '80.