RealGM NBA Top 100 list -- #1

Moderators: trex_8063, penbeast0, PaulieWal, Clyde Frazier, Doctor MJ

ardee
RealGM
Posts: 15,320
And1: 5,397
Joined: Nov 16, 2011

Re: RealGM NBA Top 100 list -- #1 

Post#281 » by ardee » Mon Jun 30, 2014 3:24 pm

MacGill wrote:
ardee wrote:
Baller2014 wrote:You can make your own arguments for whether you want to look at multiple eras at once or pick one as the standard, but you can't just look only at "relative to one era" when you know that era was a weaksauce, broken league. There was nothing standard about the Russell era.

I rate Wilt and Russell toward the end of my top 10, Oscar and Jerry might make my top 20, Baylor would be lucky to make my top 40. You say winning 11/13 titles is the greatest achievement in professional sports. I question the degree to which a lot of Russell's era was a professional league, and I've discussed this at length already. It was not just weak compared to the modern era, it wasn't a pro league. There were a handful of teams, some of them not picking the best players because they were black, some of them wanting to pick local players, relatively no training by pros at a young age, and a lot of people not being interested in basketball because it wasn't a money maker for them. The 2nd best big in Mikan's era chose to be a salesman instead of play pro-ball, and the NBA was still recovering from that sort of thing, as well as the vastly smaller talent pool to draw on because it wasn't a perceived as a pro sport, and because black players only slowly got access to the league. Russell had by far the best team and the best organisation (with ridiculously slanted rules, like no free agency, territorial picks, etc). It's no shock they won repeatedly in their 8 team, whitebread, bush league.




Posts like this one piss me off.

If you have an era bias it's one thing, but terms like that rankle me because they smack of ridiculous exaggeration and academic dishonesty.

Are you just going to ignore fplii's post about the black player percentage? Are you going to ignore the fact that the fact that the Mikan fact you mentioned is irrelevant, as it happened over a decade earlier? Are you going to ignore the fact that fewer teams means deeper teams overall, leading to teams having individual cores like Wilt/Greer/Cunningham, Wilt/Baylor/West or Frazier/DeBusschere/Reed or Barry/Thurmond?

The second half of Russell and Wilt's careers was marked by them playing HOF centers in PRACTICALLY EVERY PLAYOFF SERIES THEY PLAYED. Thurmond, Reed, Bellamy, each other... That is some of the STIFFEST competition you'll ever see, and it was possible because of this 8 team league you seem so critical of :banghead:


Ardee, don't let your emotion creep into this project. All viewpoints are allowed to be expressed here and if you callout posters it will just derail/sideline the good conversation. Make your counter debates but remember...it's a voting panel so one vote, post, in a pool of 55 is hardly going to swing the debate here. Too many good posters keeping it real for that to happen man.


My intention wasn't to start a fight.

But obviously since you're voting for Russell you know that the 60s were legitimate... It's one thing to say they're weaker but that 'bush league' comment is downright ridiculous.
User avatar
An Unbiased Fan
RealGM
Posts: 11,738
And1: 5,709
Joined: Jan 16, 2009
       

Re: RealGM NBA Top 100 list -- #1 

Post#282 » by An Unbiased Fan » Mon Jun 30, 2014 3:31 pm

Jim Naismith wrote:
Moonbeam wrote:While Bill Russell's 11 titles are unmatched as a total, from a probability perspective taking into account number of teams, MJ winning 6 titles was a bigger achievement.


Pardon my naive math, but it seems Russell's achievement has a lower probability and thus is bigger:

Russell: 8 teams, 11 championships, so Prob = (1/8)^11 = 1.16415E-10

Jordan: 30 teams, 6 championships, so Prob = (1/30)^6 = 1.37174E-09

Not so fast my friend. I don't think those are the right numbers. Plus using playoff probability is better.

Russell: 4 team playoffs = 25% chance times 8 prime runs = 2 ring estimate

MJ: 16 team playoffs = 6.7% chance times 8 prime runs = 0.5 ring estimate
^
Russell's era had 4 times the chance for a ring, and when you considered how big of an advantage an outlying team has in a 8 team league, its eve more pronounced.

Russell's era playoffs was like a NCAA conference tourney, where there really only 1 or 2 dominant teams playing for the title.

MJ's era is more like the NCAA Tourney's Sweet sixteen. Much higher degree of difficulty.
7-time RealGM MVPoster 2009-2016
Inducted into RealGM HOF 1st ballot in 2017
Notanoob
Analyst
Posts: 3,475
And1: 1,223
Joined: Jun 07, 2013

Re: RealGM NBA Top 100 list -- #1 

Post#283 » by Notanoob » Mon Jun 30, 2014 3:36 pm

ardee wrote:The second half of Russell and Wilt's careers was marked by them playing HOF centers in PRACTICALLY EVERY PLAYOFF SERIES THEY PLAYED. Thurmond, Reed, Bellamy, each other... That is some of the STIFFEST competition you'll ever see, and it was possible because of this 8 team league you seem so critical of :banghead:
I know that they're in the hall of fame, but how good were they actually? We all know that many of Russel's teammates got in the Hall basically because they were on the Celtics, not because they were particularly better players than the rest of the guys in the league. Could someone on here break down exactly how good these guys really were?
DQuinn1575
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,952
And1: 712
Joined: Feb 20, 2014

Re: RealGM NBA Top 100 list -- #1 

Post#284 » by DQuinn1575 » Mon Jun 30, 2014 3:39 pm

ThaRegul8r wrote:
DQuinn1575 wrote:
Doctor MJ wrote:Re: "He did not make any known game winning plays." Man, just listen to yourself. There isn't anyone from that time period who wouldn't laugh at your for talking like this. It blows my mind how you can be old enough to remember the '70s, but not imagine how it would sound if a younger person talked about the '70s saying "I didn't watch ball in the '70s, but I'm sure I would have heard about it if X ever did anything useful to help his team at the end of one of the 1000 games he played in."


It would help me if someone could tell me about a game winning play Russell made. Jordan, and to a lesser extent Jabbar, hold a card over Russell with game winning plays. For the Celtics it's

Selvy missed an open shot
Havlicek stole the ball
Sam Jones's shot
Don Nelson's shot
Wilt not being put in the 4th quarter


:sigh:

Despite not wanting to respond, statements made in ignorance, repeatedly, just grate at me.

Here's "a game-winning play Russell made."

Game 5 of the 1968 NBA Finals against the Los Angeles Lakers:

ThaRegul8r wrote:Boston won Game 5 120-117 in overtime to take a 3-2 lead. John Havlicek scored 31, four in overtime, Don Nelson scored 26—five in overtime, and grabbed 12 rebounds. Boston blew a 14-point fourth-quarter lead. In overtime, Boston trailed 115-113 with less than two minutes remaining when Larry Siegfried grabbed a rebound for a layup to tie the game at 115. Nelson took a rebound and scored to put Boston up 117-115. West nailed a jumper to tie the score at 117 with 56 seconds left, but Havlicek hit a jumper with 38 seconds left. “The Lakers’ Elgin Baylor appeared to get loose for a bucket that would have tied the game. But suddenly Boston player-coach Bill Russell came out of nowhere to block the shot and that was it […](Toledo Blade, May 1, 1968). Don Nelson recovered the loose ball, was fouled and “missed the first of two clutch free throws before making the final one to clinch the decision” (Toledo Blade, May 1, 1968). “I was guarding Mel Counts and I came off him to block that shot,” Russell said. “Actually, it was a very bad thing to do, but I thought I’d be sneaky, and it worked this time anyway” (Toledo Blade, May 1, 1968). Russell had 22 (6-9 FT) points and 25 rebounds


Game-saving/winning block, blocked to a teammate, Lakers were subsequently forced to foul, game over.

There's a big difference between:

"He did not make any known game winning plays."

and

"I don't know of any game-winning plays he made."

Not being aware of something doesn't mean it didn't happen.



I said it would be helpful if someone told me of a game winning play Russell made.
Thanks - this was helpful.

The summary I wrote was a reply to that statement, and no one responded with an example of a game winning play until now.

The play adds color to someone's career is basically summed up as 11 for 13.
It helps give more evidence that Russell was the main cause for the wins.
The other evidence is a Defensive Rating that includes projected, not known turnover numbers and offensive rebound numbers and incorrect FT factors for possessions.

Incorrect?

Yes, the FT factor should change for the time period when 1 free throw was shot.
When 6 less free throws a game were shot, that was not 2.4 possessions - it was 6.
That changes the FT factor - it probably also would reduce slightly the amount of turnovers.

I probably should have written my summary the way you wrote it - your phrasing is better than the way I wrote it.
But I did not make the statement repeatedly - just once in the summary.
I said it would be helpful if someone gave me examples of plays he made. And it was.
So you should have not said- statements made in ignorance, repeatedly
User avatar
MacGill
Veteran
Posts: 2,769
And1: 568
Joined: May 29, 2010
Location: From Parts Unknown...
     

Re: RealGM NBA Top 100 list -- #1 

Post#285 » by MacGill » Mon Jun 30, 2014 3:45 pm

An Unbiased Fan wrote:
Jim Naismith wrote:
Moonbeam wrote:While Bill Russell's 11 titles are unmatched as a total, from a probability perspective taking into account number of teams, MJ winning 6 titles was a bigger achievement.


Pardon my naive math, but it seems Russell's achievement has a lower probability and thus is bigger:

Russell: 8 teams, 11 championships, so Prob = (1/8)^11 = 1.16415E-10

Jordan: 30 teams, 6 championships, so Prob = (1/30)^6 = 1.37174E-09

Not so fast my friend. I don't think those are the right numbers. Plus using playoff probability is better.

Russell: 4 team playoffs = 25% chance times 8 prime runs = 2 ring estimate

MJ: 16 team playoffs = 6.7% chance times 8 prime runs = 0.5 ring estimate
^
Russell's era had 4 times the chance for a ring, and when you considered how big of an advantage an outlying team has in a 8 team league, its eve more pronounced.

Russell's era playoffs was like a NCAA conference tourney, where there really only 1 or 2 dominant teams playing for the title.

MJ's era is more like the NCAA Tourney's Sweet sixteen. Much higher degree of difficulty.


Again..I think you're placing way too much stock into this my man! Good teams win regardless of what era..and they lose as well. How many finals did Magic make it too? Bird's Celtic's? Lakers? Bulls? Spurs? Heat? It's not just about the lack of teams as you put it. More goes into having a team win than just absolute talent. The focus needed to have this happen...we have so many modern examples of collapses that to think over this period of 13 years no one even tried to figure out how to stop them with talented players as well is crazy.

The format was different, sure, and the social stance during that time probably kept the talent pool diluted some but it was even across the board. The impact has been shown which, as it is today, indicates a superstar player anchoring a team. Other teams had their superstar as well and had every opportunity to do the same thing, except they couldn't. And there is more reason for that other than just a small under-developed league with limited skill as you put it.
Image
Jim Naismith
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,221
And1: 1,974
Joined: Apr 17, 2013

Re: RealGM NBA Top 100 list -- #1 

Post#286 » by Jim Naismith » Mon Jun 30, 2014 3:56 pm

mopper8 wrote:
Jim Naismith wrote:
Moonbeam wrote:While Bill Russell's 11 titles are unmatched as a total, from a probability perspective taking into account number of teams, MJ winning 6 titles was a bigger achievement.


Pardon my naive math, but it seems Russell's achievement has a lower probability and thus is bigger:

Russell: 8 teams, 11 championships, so Prob = (1/8)^11 = 1.16415E-10

Jordan: 30 teams, 6 championships, so Prob = (1/30)^6 = 1.37174E-09


I don't think those numbers are right, thats the probability of 11 in a row or 6 in a row. 11 out of 13 (or whatever) is going to be different.

If Russell's is 11 out 13, what is Jordan's?

    6 out of 8 (just the Phil Jackson years)
    6 out of 13 (just the Bull's years)
    6 out of 15 (all years)

Let's do them all (from Excel):

P(Russell wins 11 of 13) = binom.dist(11, 13, 1/8, false) = 6.95218E-09
P(Jordan wins 6 of 8) = binom.dist(6, 8, 1/30, false) = 3.58909E-08
P(Jordan wins 6 of 13) = binom.dist(6, 13, 1/30, false) = 1.85664E-06
P(Jordan wins 6 of 15) = binom.dist(6, 15, 1/30, false) = 5.06019E-06

Seems like Russell's achievement has lower probability than Jordan's achievement, in any of these cases.
User avatar
An Unbiased Fan
RealGM
Posts: 11,738
And1: 5,709
Joined: Jan 16, 2009
       

Re: RealGM NBA Top 100 list -- #1 

Post#287 » by An Unbiased Fan » Mon Jun 30, 2014 4:09 pm

MacGill wrote:
An Unbiased Fan wrote:
Jim Naismith wrote:
Pardon my naive math, but it seems Russell's achievement has a lower probability and thus is bigger:

Russell: 8 teams, 11 championships, so Prob = (1/8)^11 = 1.16415E-10

Jordan: 30 teams, 6 championships, so Prob = (1/30)^6 = 1.37174E-09

Not so fast my friend. I don't think those are the right numbers. Plus using playoff probability is better.

Russell: 4 team playoffs = 25% chance times 8 prime runs = 2 ring estimate

MJ: 16 team playoffs = 6.7% chance times 8 prime runs = 0.5 ring estimate
^
Russell's era had 4 times the chance for a ring, and when you considered how big of an advantage an outlying team has in a 8 team league, its eve more pronounced.

Russell's era playoffs was like a NCAA conference tourney, where there really only 1 or 2 dominant teams playing for the title.

MJ's era is more like the NCAA Tourney's Sweet sixteen. Much higher degree of difficulty.


Again..I think you're placing way too much stock into this my man! Good teams win regardless of what era..and they lose as well. How many finals did Magic make it too? Bird's Celtic's? Lakers? Bulls? Spurs? Heat? It's not just about the lack of teams as you put it. More goes into having a team win than just absolute talent. The focus needed to have this happen...we have so many modern examples of collapses that to think over this period of 13 years no one even tried to figure out how to stop them with talented players as well is crazy.

The format was different, sure, and the social stance during that time probably kept the talent pool diluted some but it was even across the board. The impact has been shown which, as it is today, indicates a superstar player anchoring a team. Other teams had their superstar as well and had every opportunity to do the same thing, except they couldn't. And there is more reason for that other than just a small under-developed league with limited skill as you put it.

But the issue is the difficulty level. Just look at the SRS of Boston's playoff opponents. In a 8 team league, you'll won't have much competition if you have the best squad. There's just not enough variation. In the modern era many teams have 4 straight series against quality opponents.

Just putting things in perspective.
7-time RealGM MVPoster 2009-2016
Inducted into RealGM HOF 1st ballot in 2017
JordansBulls
RealGM
Posts: 60,467
And1: 5,349
Joined: Jul 12, 2006
Location: HCA (Homecourt Advantage)

Re: RealGM NBA Top 100 list -- #1 

Post#288 » by JordansBulls » Mon Jun 30, 2014 4:19 pm

BY Fatal9

Russell probably wasn't the the best player on the team in '68 and '69. And putting aside his poor stats in those two years, I'm not sure why it's "Russell beat Wilt" when it was Celtics beat Lakers/Sixers. I have no problem giving Russell credit when it was due, to me he outplayed Wilt in the '62 matchup, I have him higher than Wilt all-time, but he didn't beat Wilt, the Celtics did and at times Wilt beat himself (especially at the FT line).

Watch game 7 of the '69 finals for example. Russell was blowing the game because he got too excited after Mel Counts began guarding him with Wilt out. Began chucking brick after brick and Lakers made a run, but thankfully Don Nelson's miracle shot saved him from the blame which he would have received. Russell also didn't guard Wilt at the end of the '68 ECF series, it was Wayne Embry who shut down Wilt in the final two games after Wilt was killing Russell in the previous games (props to Russell for asking Embry to guard Wilt though) and that was what changed that series.


You can watch footage of the game and see Cousy absolutely DOMINATING on offense in the half an hour stretch they show (including feeding Russell to get his points).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8bwfV8BFl1A

here's the game, let me know if other people see things differently but despite the poor shooting Cousy was the best offensive player who was making everyone (including Russell) better. I'm pretty sure he had a hand in every Celtic point we see. A 30 point game in double overtime does not prove anything about his scoring abilities. We don't know his shooting numbers, nor do we have rest of the game footage because I only see Cousy feeding him easy shots in transition. I could just as easily point to Russell's 2/7 shooting in the '69 finals game 7, his 7/17 shooting in game 7 of '57 finals in games his teams definitely could have got more offense as examples of where he scored more in line with his averages.
Image
"Talent wins games, but teamwork and intelligence wins championships."
- Michael Jordan
JordansBulls
RealGM
Posts: 60,467
And1: 5,349
Joined: Jul 12, 2006
Location: HCA (Homecourt Advantage)

Re: RealGM NBA Top 100 list -- #1 

Post#289 » by JordansBulls » Mon Jun 30, 2014 4:20 pm

dice wrote:
now, let's review the track record of that loaded celtics squad:

russell's rookie year: second best team in league had 38-34 record. took celtics 7 games in finals to get past a sub-.500 hawks club. not impressive
2nd year: lost in finals (6 games) to 41-31 hawks team. not impressive
3rd year: took 7 games to get past sub-.500 club in eastern finals, then beat up another sub-.500 team in finals. not impressive
4th year: too 7 games in finals to get past team 13 games below it in regular season. not impressive
5th year: faced sub- .500 team in east finals, rolled over strong hawks team in finals. finally a relatively easy title
6th year: both playoff series go 7 games
7th year: took 7 games to get past 42-38 royals squad in east finals, took lakers in 6 for title
8th year: a second dominant playoff run
9th year: took 7 games to beat .500 sixers in east finals, rolled over lakers in finals
10th year: two of three series go the distance against weaker teams, roll over equally good sixers squad in east finals
11th year: smacked in east finals 4 games to 1 by better sixers team
12th year: takes 6 games to get past sub-.500 pistons, beat favored sixers in 7, polish off lakers in six
13th year: inspiring playoff run brings declining 48-34 celtics team a final title. russell and sam jones retire on top

-only two of russell's eleven titles featured dominant playoff runs
-22 times the celtics faced a team over .500 in the playoffs during the russell era. over the same time period, 12 series either went the distance or the celtics were upset ('58 finals)
Image
"Talent wins games, but teamwork and intelligence wins championships."
- Michael Jordan
Greatness
RealGM
Posts: 12,638
And1: 4,556
Joined: Aug 23, 2009
Location: Toronto
     

Re: RealGM NBA Top 100 list -- #1 

Post#290 » by Greatness » Mon Jun 30, 2014 4:20 pm

ronnymac2 wrote:Vote: Kareem-Abdul-Jabbar

KAJ is the GOAT because of his combination of peak performance and GOAT longevity against the greatest competition any player has ever faced. Also the different teammates, pecking orders, systems, coaches, and mini-eras he dominated or contributed to his team's success.


So Mr. Alcindor comes in wrecking the league. GOAT rookie, on par with prime Jerry West himself coming off an epic Finals MVP win. He murders the 1970 league MVP peak Willis Reed in the playoffs, but the Knicks are a machine with Debusschere and Frazier and beat MIL.

71, he gets prime Oscar and they win a title together. One of the most impressive 2-year stretches in history was the 1971-1972 Bucks. Expansion era I know, but they did what they were supposed to do. 60+ wins, ridiculous SRS, only losing in '72 to another GOAT team candidate.

A Wilt Chamberlain whose efforts are mainly focused on defense does a good job slowing 3rd-year KAJ in 1972 in the playoffs. That said, he didn't outplay KAJ. His offensive responsibility was far greater than WIlt's especially since Oscar Robertson was hurt in that series. KAJ was forced to shoulder an insane amount of offense, taking like 33 shots per game. You're percentages will fall when you need to shoot that much against an elite defender. KAJ still outscored Wilt 202-67 on the series. He had 37 points, 25 rebounds, and 8 assists in the closeout game 6 and shot 16-36 from the field. Wilt is hailed as a hero for slowing KAJ down, but they weren't in equal circumstances. KAJ could not have done more to help his team win save morph into a player who would be the guaranteed GOAT by all.

Nate Thurmond, the GOAT low post man defender, slowed KAJ in 1973 (Oscar is really in decline now). This is the last time Jabbar is really neutralized in any sense.

1974 is basically LBJ in 2009. He was clearly a champion. Probably his best year ever defensively and averaged 32 PPG and 5 APG in the playoffs on 55 percent shooting. MIL had the best SRS in the league and went 7 vs. Boston. KAJ torched an amazing defensive frontcourt of Dave Cowens and Paul Silas.

He moves to LA, and for the next 5 seasons, he essentially either has poor talent around him or incredibly mismatched talent (CoughDantleyCough). I'll quote TrueLAfan from the '79 RPOY thread here:

TrueLAfan wrote:This is another strange year, and, again, I think I'm going to be going against the grain in some of these choices. But I was watching, and I've got my reasons...although I'm curious to hear what others have to say that isn't necessarily statistically related.

1. Kareem. Suffered from voter fatigue, and a misapprehension about his team. The Lakers were a good team. On paper. This is exactly what Adrian Dantley did for the Lakers in 1978 and 1979.

--Kept Jamaal Wilkes from playing at his natural position of SF.
--Held onto the ball too long, and didn't pass out (especially to perimeter players).
--Often set up in the low post, forcing Kareem to change his game.
--Absolutely, positively, did not play D. Uh-uh.

All of this meant that the Lakers were...troubled, shall we say. Kareem was his usual self in many ways; 24 points and 13 boards a game (from now on, Kareem is going to be a great rebounder). He averaged over 5 assists a game and a hair under 4 blocks. I blame Dantley for 80% of the team's underperforming; he was a team wrecker. (The lousy bench, poor D other than Kareem, and lack of quality at SG...that hurt too.) The Lakers had zero chemistry (and they'd had plenty in, say, 1977). Jerry West (the coach at the time) had this to say. “This team has averaged 48 wins over the past three seasons, and I'll tell you what. I don't care if he's at the top of his game, past it or underneath it—without Kareem we don't beat anybody. This team just doesn't complement him at all.” (They still made it to the conference semis in two of those years, losing to eventual champs both times.)

Big laffs for me...Sports Illustrated referring to Don Ford as a “defensive” player. Don Ford couldn't guard my grandmother, and she can't go left.


TrueLAfan wrote:Again, a chunk of the problem with the Lakers rebounding this year can be traced to … Adrian Dantley. By playing at SF, he pushed Wilkes to PF. Right there, that took away Kareem’s advantages in rebounding. At a Reb % of 17.6, Kareem grabbed about 100-125 more rebounds that an “average” C with a Reb Rate of 16.0. But with Wilkes at PF combined with Don Ford—one of the worst starters I’ve ever seen—the Lakers got 1219 rebounds out of their starting SF and PF positions … a combined Reb % of 21.3. That’s bad. You should get about 23 to 23.5% of rebounds from those positions. That meant the Lakers gave back Kareem’s extra rebounds. And most of the rest of the team—Lou Hudson (who I loved, but was shot by 1979), Ron Boone, Norm Nixon—were really bad rebounders. When West points out that the Lakers didn’t compliment Kareem well, he’s right. Kareem's scoring took a hit because his usage dropped so much...14% to be exact. That's more than his socring drop, even adjusted per minute. Why did Kareem's usage drop? Because the team had added a player who took as many shots per mintue as Cap, held the ball too long, and caused a disruption to the offense that was much more obvious when you were watching than it is in the box scores (although when you know about it, the statistical evidence is there too.) Put it this way...who do you think should be leading the team in usage? The five time MVP with the best halfcourt move in the history of basketball, or the second year player who forced a starter to play out of position? Guess which player led the Lakers in usage?

I should add this...maybe Kareem should have said something publically. I have the feeling, based on what West said at the time and since, that it was brought up to and known by coaching and management. The problems with the team (and Dantley, in particualr) were not a mystery. But should Kareem have put his foot down? Would that have helped the situation? Would it have helped the team? It’s hard to say. It was a different time, and players operated differently with the media in terms of asserting power and having their reputations established. I have the feeling that if Elvin Hayes had had a microphone in his face as often as, say, Allen Iverson has/had, he’d have a very different legacy. But, all in all, I can’t fault Kareem for this. I think he’s naturally taciturn, and I think West didn’t want to play up the mistake in picking up Dantley. But, for me, that doesn’t affect Kareem’s value. And I think it should be noted that when Dantley got his wish and went to a team that allowed him free rein on offense, he never got his team to as many wins as the Lakers did in a season of disruption where there was great parity in the league.


Nevermind that the man obliterated one of the GOAT defensive frontcourts in Bill Walton/Mo Lucas in the '77 WCF with literally **** players around him, while Coach Ramsay's Blazers were a Spurs-like machine.

We get to 1980, where his GOAT-esque season and playoffs is overshadowed by arguably the GOAT performance on the last game of the season by his teammate, Earvin Johnson. KAJ would have been REG SEA MVP and Finals MVP if the voters weren't idiots. KAJ was definitely the lead dog on that team.

1981...outrebounds Moses Malone in a 3-game series. Outplays Moses Malone. He's still arguably the best player in the league.

1982...This is, in my opinion, his most impressive year so far. His team is oozing with talent, so the man tempers his scoring to allow LA to have five (5!) players average 16.7 PPG in the playoffs. That's insane balance. KAJ protects the basket as LA plays an amazing trap D and runs over the league over the last half the season and through the playoffs.

1983...One of the best. Moses Malone dominates him on the glass in the NBA Finals, but KAJ's offensive output is amazing. Moses can't guard KAJ, but KAJ can guard Moses on his initial drives and postups. Moses' offensive rebounding hurts LA though.

1985...man wins Finals MVP 14 years after he won his first. That's a record. Does it against Bird/Parish/McHale. The man would have had at least 5 Finals MVPs if Oscar wasn't hurt in 1972, Richie Powers wasn't a douchebag in 1974, and voters weren't incompetent in 1980. Just my opinion.

The man continued to compete at a high level against some of the best frontcourt players ever. Was still contributing to title teams in his later years. Always a devastating scorer. Could hit free throws. Really no weakness.

Competition: The man faced Wilt Chamberlain, Nate Thurmond, Willis Reed, Dave Cowens (with Paul Silas), Bill Walton (with Mo Lucas), Wes Unseld (with Elvin Hayes), Artis Gilmore, Bob Lanier, Moses Malone, Robert Parish (with Bird/McHale/Walton), Akeem Olajuwon (with Ralph Sampson), Patrick Ewing, Bill Laimbeer (with Mahorn/Rodman), and Jack Sikma.

The only truly all-time great centers he never faced were George Mikan, Bill Russell, Shaq, David Robinson, Dwight Howard and Alonzo Mourning. He faced everybody else, pretty much all in their primes. Worst thing you could say was Kareem was outrebounded by peak Moses Malone in 1983 and stifled by GOAT man defender Nate Thurmond in 1973.

He whipped everybody else's ass. Kicked ass for 20 years. Contributed to winning teams no matter what. He was on great teams. He was on terrible teams. Nobody did more for his team in my opinion.

Thank you for making Kareem's case much better than I ever could :)
JordansBulls
RealGM
Posts: 60,467
And1: 5,349
Joined: Jul 12, 2006
Location: HCA (Homecourt Advantage)

Re: RealGM NBA Top 100 list -- #1 

Post#291 » by JordansBulls » Mon Jun 30, 2014 4:22 pm

By tsherkin

I would assume that you'd have to enter a discussion where we reevaluated what it all meant.

12 wins versus 15 wins is something to consider... but the 57 Celtics went 7-3 in the playoffs. That's a HUGE difference. They went 8-3 the next year they won (59). 8-5, 8-2, 8-6, 8-5, 8-2, 8-4...

It isn't until 66 that they start going through three rounds. 12-6, 7-2, 12-7, 12-6.

So yeah, obviously they had the stuff to win 12-win titles and everything, but of the 11 titles, 9 of them were at 8 or fewer wins. That's got to count for something, since that's 50% fewer wins than are required in the modern era (or thereabouts, if you go back to the 15-win era). That's got to be considered.
Image
"Talent wins games, but teamwork and intelligence wins championships."
- Michael Jordan
User avatar
mopper8
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 42,618
And1: 4,870
Joined: Jul 18, 2004
Location: Petting elephants with the coolest dude alive

Re: RealGM NBA Top 100 list -- #1 

Post#292 » by mopper8 » Mon Jun 30, 2014 4:27 pm

An Unbiased Fan wrote:
Jim Naismith wrote:
Moonbeam wrote:While Bill Russell's 11 titles are unmatched as a total, from a probability perspective taking into account number of teams, MJ winning 6 titles was a bigger achievement.


Pardon my naive math, but it seems Russell's achievement has a lower probability and thus is bigger:

Russell: 8 teams, 11 championships, so Prob = (1/8)^11 = 1.16415E-10

Jordan: 30 teams, 6 championships, so Prob = (1/30)^6 = 1.37174E-09

Not so fast my friend. I don't think those are the right numbers. Plus using playoff probability is better.

Russell: 4 team playoffs = 25% chance times 8 prime runs = 2 ring estimate

MJ: 16 team playoffs = 6.7% chance times 8 prime runs = 0.5 ring estimate
^
Russell's era had 4 times the chance for a ring, and when you considered how big of an advantage an outlying team has in a 8 team league, its eve more pronounced.

Russell's era playoffs was like a NCAA conference tourney, where there really only 1 or 2 dominant teams playing for the title.

MJ's era is more like the NCAA Tourney's Sweet sixteen. Much higher degree of difficulty.


I don't know if I buy the numbers you're using here, but I do buy the logic and it was something I was trying to get at earlier by looking at total # of playoff series won--Jordan won as many series in his 8 years with Phil as Russell did in his entire career (same # of losses too). To me, setting aside everything else, it's still less impressive to win a title when you only have to win 2 playoffs series than if you have to win 4.
DragicTime85 wrote:[Ric Bucher] has a tiny wiener and I can prove it.
Owly
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,676
And1: 3,173
Joined: Mar 12, 2010

Re: RealGM NBA Top 100 list -- #1 

Post#293 » by Owly » Mon Jun 30, 2014 4:29 pm

DQuinn1575 wrote:
ardee wrote:
I personally believe the whole prime/peak thing is a little overrated. It's fun to discuss the best peak, but when you're evaluating players for their entire careers, you should look at the sum of value provided over every year of their careers.



Is that the sole criteria here - sum value provided over career? - feel free for anyone to comment- I'm at a combination of peak/prime/career value

I'll chime in here. Based on (all of) what Ardee said it doesn't sound like he's just looking at net value per se, so much as something which includes net value (net value+ ?) whereby higher production levels (typically, great peaks, but a handful might keep it up over their career) effectively recieve a multiplier on the basis that it's more valuable the further you distance yourself from the pack, because it leads to a greater probability of team champtionships (1 year of a 10 SRS team has a better championship probability than two years of 5 SRS). You might perhaps call it influence on championship probability.

This is something like what I look at though I do so in a fairly non-systematic way (mentally I don't particularly frame it as influence on title probability). I guess non-systematically approached you could just say career value added matters, and it should really ever be ignored, but greater peaks/primes are also a factor (though for me the specific single season apex isn't that important, as I say the aspiration is to see value added, but whilst acknowledging that the further away from the pack you are the same increment of improvement gets more valuable).

FWIW I, (and the metrics) think Chuck and the Mailman's (RS) peaks are pretty close to identical, with,for me, Mailman taking an edge due to consistently good D.
User avatar
MacGill
Veteran
Posts: 2,769
And1: 568
Joined: May 29, 2010
Location: From Parts Unknown...
     

Re: RealGM NBA Top 100 list -- #1 

Post#294 » by MacGill » Mon Jun 30, 2014 4:31 pm

An Unbiased Fan wrote:But the issue is the difficulty level. Just look at the SRS of Boston's playoff opponents. In a 8 team league, you'll won't have much competition if you have the best squad. There's just not enough variation. In the modern era many teams have 4 straight series against quality opponents.

Just putting things in perspective.


You're focusing on one aspect without allowing yourself to understand the degree of difficulty that actually happened had.

Re: Difficulty level - Like the 80's West or how about the East in the 200's etc. Same thing happens because when all players are close in level seperation occurs. But guess what...the LBJ's, KD's, Kobe's, Shaq's, Duncan's, MJ's all stand out and all make the (much better athlete as you put it) look less than normal.

Re: Putting things in perspective: What doesn't change is the commitment needed to have a team remain competitive and in tact for so long. Implosion, desire, conflict....these are things we have all seen in earlier/modern nba. You're very quick to sum it up to weaker overall players..but than the degree of difficulty to overtake a team like this with another superstar should be less, no? Especially as the susperstar anchor was defensive and you have stated that Russell wasn't great offensively. Russell wasn't close to the offensive star of his time and you prefer offense versus defense. Teams with these high offense stars clearly should have had a field day than. But that isn't what happens because the Russell effect is a whole team deep.

So it should be just shocking than, that a player of this unique skill set could be the force behind such a fluke :roll: The dude did it as a player coach. How many ATG's do we sit and discuss around the fact that they weren't utilized properly?
Image
Doctor MJ
Senior Mod
Senior Mod
Posts: 53,594
And1: 22,559
Joined: Mar 10, 2005
Location: Cali
     

Re: RealGM NBA Top 100 list -- #1 

Post#295 » by Doctor MJ » Mon Jun 30, 2014 4:51 pm

ardee wrote:
therealbig3 wrote:Here's how I've got the voting, just to make sure it's accurate (only counting the votes from the list penbeast0 made in the other thread):

Michael Jordan: 22 (Basketballefan, JordansBulls, SactoKingsFan, GC Pantalones, Baller2014, Dr Positivity, PCProductions, therealbig3, Quotatious, kayess, batmana, trex_8063, Jaivl, DannyNoonan1221, Owly, Mutnt, DHodgkins, An Unbiased Fan, O_6, rich316, DQuinn1575, Moonbeam)

Bill Russell: 9 (penbeast0, Texas Chuck, Warspite, Dr Spaceman, ardee, fpliii, Doctor MJ, drza, magicmerl)

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar: 2 (Greatness, ronnymac2)


Last vote counted: Moonbeam, post #262


I'm impressed we got 9 Russell votes. On any other board this would have been a walkover for Jordan.


Eh well, no on many boards Wilt would give him a good battle. (He said to the Wilt avatar. :oops: )
Getting ready for the RealGM 100 on the PC Board

Come join the WNBA Board if you're a fan!
ceiling raiser
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,531
And1: 3,754
Joined: Jan 27, 2013

Re: RealGM NBA Top 100 list -- #1 

Post#296 » by ceiling raiser » Mon Jun 30, 2014 5:01 pm

ThaRegul8r wrote:Game-saving/winning block, blocked to a teammate, Lakers were subsequently forced to foul, game over.

There's a big difference between:

"He did not make any known game winning plays."

and

"I don't know of any game-winning plays he made."

Not being aware of something doesn't mean it didn't happen.

:clap:

Great post. Here are a few of Russell's game-winning shots in particular:

1/25/1959 vs DET:
With 36 seconds remaining in the extra session, the Celts were hanging onto the slimmest of advantages, 117 to 116. They had to get off a shot within 24 seconds or lose possession. Cousy flipped to Tom Heinsohn, who had a fair shot, but instead sped a tricky pass to Russell, under the Celts' basket. Russell took the ball on the right side under the rim, and left-handed it off the backboard for Boston's 118th and 119th point, which eventually proved the ball game.


2/1/1959 vs SYR:
Sharman's side jump shot with 1:20 left put the Celts ahead, 137 to 135. The Nats' Dolph Schayes, who poured in 50 points for the highest single-game total of his 11-year career, then missed a jump shot and Russell hit a turning right-hand hook for a four-point bulge and the clincher.


3/9/1961 N DET
Bill Russell dropped in a one-hander with 15 seconds left tonight to give Boston a 119 to 118 victory over Detroit and hurt the Pistons' chances for a playoff spot in the National Basketball Association. The Celtics came from 16 points down in the thrid quarter. After Russell's basket, Detroit put the basket into play only to see Boston intercept. The Pistons then fouled K.C. Jones, who hit on one of three free throw attempts, giving Boston a two-point lead with four seconds left. The Pistons' Walt Dukes called time out—Detroit's sixth of the game, thereby incurring a technical foul. Frank Ramsey added the point, icing the game. Boston let Detroit's Gene Shue score unmolested at the final buzzer.


3/12/1961 @ SYR
A basket by Bill Russell with 13 seconds left gave the Boston Celtics a 136 to 134 overtime victory over the Syracuse Nationals as the regular National Basketball Assn. season ended today.


1/28/1967 @ NYK
Howell knocked a ball loose at the New York end of the floor and the ball and the chance to tie it was Boston's. Sam Shot from about 20-feet out and Howell was on the spot to tap in the rebound and tie the score. After an offensive foul on Walt Bellamy with 30 seconds left, the Celtics had ther only chance to take the lead since the second quarter. Russell took a pass in the key with nine seconds left—moved right and hooked left to clinch the victory.


3/11/1967 @ PHI
Larry Siegfried brought the ball down for the Celtics and played ponk-ponk with it for several seconds in the right corner. Then he drove for the basket and the 76ers collapsed on him. He flpped the ball to Russell alone on the right side. Russell carefully dipped and measured the shot before tossing the 15-foot jumper. It whisked through the nets to give Boston the lead. Wally Jones missed a desperation shot from midcourt as the buzzer sounded and the 76ers made a vain effort to call time out.


There are also plenty of game-winning/game-saving plays that aren't necessarily game-winning shots...

Here's another couple of clutch blocks:

G7 57 Finals vs STL:
4Q: "Russell scored the game-saving basket at the end of regulation play. Then he topped this with a tremendous blok on Jack Coleman's shot which would have given the Hawks the victory." OT: "Ramsey delivered seven of his club's eight points in overtime. Then he tossed in a 20-foot push shot to extend the Celtics second-overtime margin to 124 to 121, which practically meant the ball game." 2OT: "With the score in the second overtime tied at 121 and two and one-half minutes left, Ramsey calmly converted a free try when hit by Macauley. It was Easy Ed's sixth, so Hannum came off the bench for the first time in three weeks. Here Russell went high to block Ned Park's field goal try and with possession the Celts saw the amazingly cool Ramsey hit a 20-foot right-hand push shot from outside the key for a 124-121 lead as the house resounded with cheers.


Some decisive rebounds:

2/12/1966 vs PHI:
Chet Walker scored the 76ers last basket of the night and only their second in the last half of the quarter, making it 83 to 79. Bonham, who missed his first couple of tries before heating up, then connected on two more from the top of the key to tie the game, 83-all, with less than a minute to go. Their tight defense paid off big at this point as the Celts forced Philadelphia to use up their 24 seconds and Boston gained possession. The Celtics worked the ball around, pretending to set up Bonham again, but Siegfried took the crucial shot and made it give the Celts an 85 to 83 lead with 15 seconds showing. Russ then pulled down the biggest rebound of the game after a Luscious Jackson miss and Boston held on.


1/22/1967 vs LAL:
Siegfried passed the ball in with 17 seconds left, received a return pass and attempted an off-balance jumper from the foul line as Hazzard embraced him. Siegfried made both shots and the Celtics led by a point with 12 seconds to go. Los Angeles called a timeout and Russell ran in his defensive platoon: Satch Sanders for Howell and K.C. Jones for Sam Jones. This time West dribbled in to the left center, playing one-on-one with K.C. The Celtics' backcourt man wouldn't give him a route for the basket and West missed a jumper with five seconds left. Russell came down with the rebound and was tied up by Baylor for a jump ball. Russ tapped the ball toward the left corner and K.C. came up with it as the buzzer sounded.


11/9/1968 @ MIL
Sam Jones' jump shot with 32 seconds remaining Saturday night gave the Celtics a 98-97 victory over the Milwaukee Bucks at Milwaukee Arena. Russell, who played his usual fine defensive game, prevented the Bucks from getting a final shot in the game. With eight seconds left, Milwaukee committed a strategic foul on Tom Sanders. The Celtics' forward missed the shot but Russell was able to grab the ball before it went out of bounds and passed it back to Sanders.


(Source is Boston Globe for all quotes.)
Now that's the difference between first and last place.
Doctor MJ
Senior Mod
Senior Mod
Posts: 53,594
And1: 22,559
Joined: Mar 10, 2005
Location: Cali
     

Re: RealGM NBA Top 100 list -- #1 

Post#297 » by Doctor MJ » Mon Jun 30, 2014 5:03 pm

Baller2014 wrote:If I had accused you of bad faith, I'd be getting warned now. Do me a favour and please assume my posts are all in good faith thanks. I posted a great deal of evidence to this effect, and have been engaging in an in depth discussion on these points. I would like it to continue to be a civil discussion.


Only responding to this, and doing so quickly because I'm tight on time today.

I wouldn't call it bad faith. The tendency to grab on to the aspects of a statement that you can do the most with to further your argument is just part of having debates. We all do it to some degree, and many don't even realize they are supposed to be doing anything differently.

I just see you doing it particularly hard. When you use nomenclature X to champion Jordan and nomenclature Y to knock Russell, when Russell actually looks better by both simplistic measurements, it's annoying to say the least.

Now, in the stuff I cut out here you go on into more depth explaining why you see superficiality to Russell's edge, which is a very reasonable thing to do if someone had started this conversation with this stuff, but you're the one who brought it up, and you're the one who switched up nomenclature when rebutted. So now you're basically explaining to me why the thing you brought up in the first place is too superficial to make a real argument on. And yeah, I agree.

When I brought up basically that Jordan was going to win no matter what, my point is really that the goal here isn't to "win", it's to have quality discussion. And quality discussion means monitoring yourself and trying your best not to get all rhetorical on it. Stuff like this will still come up in the project, and I'll probably fall prey to it myself now and then, but the important thing is to try.
Getting ready for the RealGM 100 on the PC Board

Come join the WNBA Board if you're a fan!
DQuinn1575
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,952
And1: 712
Joined: Feb 20, 2014

Re: RealGM NBA Top 100 list -- #1 

Post#298 » by DQuinn1575 » Mon Jun 30, 2014 5:14 pm

fpliii wrote:
ThaRegul8r wrote:Game-saving/winning block, blocked to a teammate, Lakers were subsequently forced to foul, game over.

There's a big difference between:

"He did not make any known game winning plays."

and

"I don't know of any game-winning plays he made."

Not being aware of something doesn't mean it didn't happen.

:clap:

Great post. Here are a few of Russell's game-winning shots in particular:

1/25/1959 vs DET:
With 36 seconds remaining in the extra session, the Celts were hanging onto the slimmest of advantages, 117 to 116. They had to get off a shot within 24 seconds or lose possession. Cousy flipped to Tom Heinsohn, who had a fair shot, but instead sped a tricky pass to Russell, under the Celts' basket. Russell took the ball on the right side under the rim, and left-handed it off the backboard for Boston's 118th and 119th point, which eventually proved the ball game.


2/1/1959 vs SYR:
Sharman's side jump shot with 1:20 left put the Celts ahead, 137 to 135. The Nats' Dolph Schayes, who poured in 50 points for the highest single-game total of his 11-year career, then missed a jump shot and Russell hit a turning right-hand hook for a four-point bulge and the clincher.


3/9/1961 N DET
Bill Russell dropped in a one-hander with 15 seconds left tonight to give Boston a 119 to 118 victory over Detroit and hurt the Pistons' chances for a playoff spot in the National Basketball Association. The Celtics came from 16 points down in the thrid quarter. After Russell's basket, Detroit put the basket into play only to see Boston intercept. The Pistons then fouled K.C. Jones, who hit on one of three free throw attempts, giving Boston a two-point lead with four seconds left. The Pistons' Walt Dukes called time out—Detroit's sixth of the game, thereby incurring a technical foul. Frank Ramsey added the point, icing the game. Boston let Detroit's Gene Shue score unmolested at the final buzzer.


3/12/1961 @ SYR
A basket by Bill Russell with 13 seconds left gave the Boston Celtics a 136 to 134 overtime victory over the Syracuse Nationals as the regular National Basketball Assn. season ended today.


1/28/1967 @ NYK
Howell knocked a ball loose at the New York end of the floor and the ball and the chance to tie it was Boston's. Sam Shot from about 20-feet out and Howell was on the spot to tap in the rebound and tie the score. After an offensive foul on Walt Bellamy with 30 seconds left, the Celtics had ther only chance to take the lead since the second quarter. Russell took a pass in the key with nine seconds left—moved right and hooked left to clinch the victory.


3/11/1967 @ PHI
Larry Siegfried brought the ball down for the Celtics and played ponk-ponk with it for several seconds in the right corner. Then he drove for the basket and the 76ers collapsed on him. He flpped the ball to Russell alone on the right side. Russell carefully dipped and measured the shot before tossing the 15-foot jumper. It whisked through the nets to give Boston the lead. Wally Jones missed a desperation shot from midcourt as the buzzer sounded and the 76ers made a vain effort to call time out.


There are also plenty of game-winning/game-saving plays that aren't necessarily game-winning shots...

Here's another couple of clutch blocks:

G7 57 Finals vs STL:
4Q: "Russell scored the game-saving basket at the end of regulation play. Then he topped this with a tremendous blok on Jack Coleman's shot which would have given the Hawks the victory." OT: "Ramsey delivered seven of his club's eight points in overtime. Then he tossed in a 20-foot push shot to extend the Celtics second-overtime margin to 124 to 121, which practically meant the ball game." 2OT: "With the score in the second overtime tied at 121 and two and one-half minutes left, Ramsey calmly converted a free try when hit by Macauley. It was Easy Ed's sixth, so Hannum came off the bench for the first time in three weeks. Here Russell went high to block Ned Park's field goal try and with possession the Celts saw the amazingly cool Ramsey hit a 20-foot right-hand push shot from outside the key for a 124-121 lead as the house resounded with cheers.


Some decisive rebounds:

2/12/1966 vs PHI:
Chet Walker scored the 76ers last basket of the night and only their second in the last half of the quarter, making it 83 to 79. Bonham, who missed his first couple of tries before heating up, then connected on two more from the top of the key to tie the game, 83-all, with less than a minute to go. Their tight defense paid off big at this point as the Celts forced Philadelphia to use up their 24 seconds and Boston gained possession. The Celtics worked the ball around, pretending to set up Bonham again, but Siegfried took the crucial shot and made it give the Celts an 85 to 83 lead with 15 seconds showing. Russ then pulled down the biggest rebound of the game after a Luscious Jackson miss and Boston held on.


1/22/1967 vs LAL:
Siegfried passed the ball in with 17 seconds left, received a return pass and attempted an off-balance jumper from the foul line as Hazzard embraced him. Siegfried made both shots and the Celtics led by a point with 12 seconds to go. Los Angeles called a timeout and Russell ran in his defensive platoon: Satch Sanders for Howell and K.C. Jones for Sam Jones. This time West dribbled in to the left center, playing one-on-one with K.C. The Celtics' backcourt man wouldn't give him a route for the basket and West missed a jumper with five seconds left. Russell came down with the rebound and was tied up by Baylor for a jump ball. Russ tapped the ball toward the left corner and K.C. came up with it as the buzzer sounded.


11/9/1968 @ MIL
Sam Jones' jump shot with 32 seconds remaining Saturday night gave the Celtics a 98-97 victory over the Milwaukee Bucks at Milwaukee Arena. Russell, who played his usual fine defensive game, prevented the Bucks from getting a final shot in the game. With eight seconds left, Milwaukee committed a strategic foul on Tom Sanders. The Celtics' forward missed the shot but Russell was able to grab the ball before it went out of bounds and passed it back to Sanders.


(Source is Boston Globe for all quotes.)



Great stuff - thanks!
penbeast0
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Posts: 30,439
And1: 9,963
Joined: Aug 14, 2004
Location: South Florida
 

Re: RealGM NBA Top 100 list -- #1 

Post#299 » by penbeast0 » Mon Jun 30, 2014 5:21 pm

mopper8 wrote:
An Unbiased Fan wrote:
Jim Naismith wrote:
Pardon my naive math, but it seems Russell's achievement has a lower probability and thus is bigger:

Russell: 8 teams, 11 championships, so Prob = (1/8)^11 = 1.16415E-10

Jordan: 30 teams, 6 championships, so Prob = (1/30)^6 = 1.37174E-09

Not so fast my friend. I don't think those are the right numbers. Plus using playoff probability is better.

Russell: 4 team playoffs = 25% chance times 8 prime runs = 2 ring estimate

MJ: 16 team playoffs = 6.7% chance times 8 prime runs = 0.5 ring estimate
^
Russell's era had 4 times the chance for a ring, and when you considered how big of an advantage an outlying team has in a 8 team league, its eve more pronounced.

Russell's era playoffs was like a NCAA conference tourney, where there really only 1 or 2 dominant teams playing for the title.

MJ's era is more like the NCAA Tourney's Sweet sixteen. Much higher degree of difficulty.


I don't know if I buy the numbers you're using here, but I do buy the logic and it was something I was trying to get at earlier by looking at total # of playoff series won--Jordan won as many series in his 8 years with Phil as Russell did in his entire career (same # of losses too). To me, setting aside everything else, it's still less impressive to win a title when you only have to win 2 playoffs series than if you have to win 4.


Why only count the Phil years? Are you implying that Jordan wasn't a GOAT level player without Phil (I'd agree though I still think he's the GOAT SG but I doubt JordansBulls would) or just that he wasn't a GOAT level player the first half of his career?
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
O_6
Rookie
Posts: 1,178
And1: 1,586
Joined: Aug 25, 2010

Re: RealGM NBA Top 100 list -- #1 

Post#300 » by O_6 » Mon Jun 30, 2014 5:21 pm

The Russell vs. Jordan arguments have been excellent. But because Russell is such a unique player in terms of his impact, it is such a weird argument to compare him to MJ.

MJ vs. Kareem is a much more straightforward argument because both guys were dominant offensive players who were also very valuable on the defensive end. Unlike with Russell, Individual Offensive stats are a huge part of both players' argument. I voted for MJ and I'm probably going to vote Russell #2, but I'm a little shocked at the huge difference between MJ and Kareem in terms of the results on this thread.

The longevity edge for Kareem over MJ is just massive...

Player ---------- Top 5 in MVP vote
Jordan ------------------ 10 times ------------ 41,011 minutes (27th all-time)
Kareem ----------------- 15 times ------------ 57,446 minutes (1st all-time)

That is just an enormous difference we are talking about right there. So for one to consider Jordan the GOAT over Kareem, he'd need to consider Jordan a clearly superior player at his peak. Jordan only played 11 full seasons with the Bulls over his career. Here is how he compared with Kareem through 11 full years each...

Player -------- WinShares over 11 years
Jordan ------------------------- 200.6 ------ 13.4 Win Shares outside of Top 11 years
Kareem ------------------------ 190.8 ------ 82.6 Win Shares outside of Top 11 years

Win Shares is obviously a limited metric and one that I'm not going to live and die with, but I think the results above give a pretty damn good job of highlighting Kareem's enormous edge over MJ in terms of longevity. You could argue that Jordan had the better prime by a slight amount, but Kareem has the overwhelming edge in terms of success after his 11th season.

- Jordan had the better peak (Jordan #1 Peak by RealGM Peaks Project, Kareem was #6)
- Kareem at his peak was "stopped" by Wilt and Thurmond, Jordan was never "stopped"
- Jordan had more team success in his prime (Kareem ended up winning 6 titles)


So Kareem's Peak being slightly below GOAT caliber and his mid/late 70s run of team mediocrity are the only things really holding him back from being considered the all-around GOAT. But was Kareem's peak really that much lower? He had consistently all-time great seasons from '71-'77 and he had a couple of all-time great playoff runs in '77 and '80.

Being stopped by Wilt and Nate Thurmond a couple of times showed his mortality in a way Jordan never did. But who accomplished more than Kareem? Wouldn't you take Kareem with the #1 pick in an All-Time Draft over Jordan considering his position and longevity? Wouldn't you agree that Kareem demolishes Jordan in longevity and is only slightly below him in Peak prowess? Wouldn't you agree that Jordan's peak would need to be considered significantly better to take him as the GOAT over Kareem?

I chose Jordan but this is just food for though since I feel like Kareem is being under-represented here.

Return to Player Comparisons