RealGM 2017 Top 100 List: #18

[Outside]

It doesn't matter so much for this thread, but for the next one I'm going to need to decide on a hierarchy between Charles Barkley and Moses Malone.

This is one I've flip-flopped on for years, I never land on an order that feels final to me. It fairly literally feels like a coin-flip. So here is one where I am truly looking for some guidance or inspiration. Can anyone provide an argument for one over the other that will more solidly convince me of an appropriate relation between these two?

Advantages for Moses:

-- Longevity: 21 seasons for Moses, 16 of them at a very good or excellent level of productivity, vs 16 seasons for Barkley, 12 at very good or excellent productivity

-- Defense: stats for this are hard to come by, but Moses was just plain better.

-- MVPs: 3 for Moses vs 1 for Barkley

-- Titles: 1 for Moses vs none for Barkley

Advantages for Barkley:

-- Efficiency: .612 career TS% vs .569 for Moses

-- Assists: 5.4 APG and 17.5 AST% career average vs 1.3/5.9% (ugh) for Moses

-- Better overall playoff success: despite playing 5 fewer seasons, Barkley played 123 playoff games vs 100 for Moses

Hardly a comprehensive analysis, but they're close overall. Which one wins out depends on what you value more.

[Outside]

I've changed my thinking a bit here.

Vote: John Havlicek
Alternate: David Robinson

I had been going with Moses, but I'm downgrading him because of having so few seasons with any playoff success and for such bad assist numbers, both APG and AST%.

I realize that my vote for Havlicek is likely symbolic only and that my alternate vote will likely be the one that counts, but the more I think about it, the more I like Havlicek. Havlicek had such great playoff success, while Robinson shrank a bit in the playoffs. Robinson gets the edge for defense, but Havlicek gets the edge for tremendous versatility and having such a complete all-around game.

Havlicek was a crucial contributor during the Russell years and the featured scorer during the post-Russell, Cowens years. Eight titles vs two for Robinson. Robinson does have an MVP, but Hakeem took some of the shine off that trophy. Havlicek has the edge over Robinson in longevity -- 1,270 RS and 172 PS games vs 987 RS and 123 PS games for Robinson.

[trex_8063]

Thru post #62:

David Robinson - 7 (2klegend, andrewww, Doctor MJ, Dr Positivity, Narigo, RCM88x, trex_8063)
Moses Malone - 2 (JordansBulls, scabbarista)
Charles Barkley - 2 (oldschooled, Winsome Gerbil)
George Mikan - 1 (penbeast0)
John Havlicek - 1 (Outside)

I'll leave this open a little longer, but I may shut this one down a few hours early in favor of a few extra hours on the next thread, since it seems as though Robinson is running away with this one anyway (he has an outright majority so far, and five of the six non-DRob votes have Robinson as their secondary pick).

[Pablo Novi]

Vote: Bob Pettit (my GOAT #3 PF) "Great Years +" "Points": 43.3
Alt: Bob Cousy (my GOAT #3 PG) "Great Years +" "Points": 40
H.M.: Elgin Baylor (my GOAT #4 SF) "Great Years +" "Points": 46.7

These are the only 3 remaining guys with 10 ALL-League First-Team selections - basically a decade of dominating their position.
All 3 revolutionized their position.

I have Pettit over Cousy because I believe his First-Team & 2nd-Team selections are a little more valuable.

I have them both over Elgin because I put one player per position in each descending set of 5 GOAT rankings. So, Elgin's in the next group.

[penbeast0]

Vote: Bob Pettit (my GOAT #3 PF) "Great Years +" "Points": 43.3
Alt: Bob Cousy (my GOAT #3 PG) "Great Years +" "Points": 40
H.M.: Elgin Baylor (my GOAT #4 SF) "Great Years +" "Points": 46.7

These are the only 3 remaining guys with 10 ALL-League First-Team selections - basically a decade of dominating their position.
All 3 revolutionized their position.

I have Pettit over Cousy because I believe his First-Team & 2nd-Team selections are a little more valuable.

I have them both over Elgin because I put one player per position in each descending set of 5 GOAT rankings. So, Elgin's in the next group.

Re: Pettit -- do you really think his impact was close to that of Mikan? I love him and have him as my #5 PF of all time but he was basically Karl Malone in terms of impact. Mikan was a lot more.

Re: Cousy -- in his prime in the 50s, he carried his team (with good scorers Bill Sharman and Ed Macauley) to 2nd, 3rd, 3rd, and 2nd place finishes in a 4 team conference pre-Russell. With Russell, he had some of the worst playoffs of all time. Is he really better than Frazier? Stockton? Nash? Paul? If so, why?

[trex_8063]

Vote: Bob Pettit (my GOAT #3 PF) "Great Years +" "Points": 43.3
Alt: Bob Cousy (my GOAT #3 PG) "Great Years +" "Points": 40
H.M.: Elgin Baylor (my GOAT #4 SF) "Great Years +" "Points": 46.7

These are the only 3 remaining guys with 10 ALL-League First-Team selections - basically a decade of dominating their position.
All 3 revolutionized their position.

I have Pettit over Cousy because I believe his First-Team & 2nd-Team selections are a little more valuable.

I have them both over Elgin because I put one player per position in each descending set of 5 GOAT rankings. So, Elgin's in the next group.

Re: Pettit -- do you really think his impact was close to that of Mikan? I love him and have him as my #5 PF of all time but he was basically Karl Malone in terms of impact. Mikan was a lot more.

Re: Cousy -- in his prime in the 50s, he carried his team (with good scorers Bill Sharman and Ed Macauley) to 2nd, 3rd, 3rd, and 2nd place finishes in a 4 team conference pre-Russell. With Russell, he had some of the worst playoffs of all time. Is he really better than Frazier? Stockton? Nash? Paul? If so, why?

Re: Pettit - I would counter by noting he played in a tougher era, though, and also note his longevity appears superior (even if we count Mikan's NBL years).

Re: Cousy - I know I'll be championing Cousy sooner than most on this forum. But I do generally agree there's ample room to question whether he belongs ahead of Stockton, Nash, Paul, Frazier (or Kidd, Payton, Isiah, Curry, etc, for that matter).

[trex_8063]

Thru post #66 (14 votes, 8 for majority):

David Robinson - 7 (2klegend, andrewww, Doctor MJ, Dr Positivity, Narigo, RCM88x, trex_8063)
Moses Malone - 2 (JordansBulls, scabbarista)
Charles Barkley - 2 (oldschooled, Winsome Gerbil)
George Mikan - 1 (penbeast0)
John Havlicek - 1 (Outside)
Bob Pettit - 1 (Pablo Novi)


Calling it for Robinson. He's got 7 of 14, eliminating Mikan/Hondo/Pettit transfers TWO additional votes to him. He's got most of the secondary votes from the Malone/Barkley voters, too. It's clear he's taking this one. I'd rather just have the next thread open a couple hours longer, hoping we get some good Moses v Barkley discussions, as it should be very close between those two.
Will have the next thread up soon.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

[feyki]

Vote: Bob Pettit (my GOAT #3 PF) "Great Years +" "Points": 43.3
Alt: Bob Cousy (my GOAT #3 PG) "Great Years +" "Points": 40
H.M.: Elgin Baylor (my GOAT #4 SF) "Great Years +" "Points": 46.7

These are the only 3 remaining guys with 10 ALL-League First-Team selections - basically a decade of dominating their position.
All 3 revolutionized their position.

I have Pettit over Cousy because I believe his First-Team & 2nd-Team selections are a little more valuable.

I have them both over Elgin because I put one player per position in each descending set of 5 GOAT rankings. So, Elgin's in the next group.

Re: Pettit -- do you really think his impact was close to that of Mikan? I love him and have him as my #5 PF of all time but he was basically Karl Malone in terms of impact. Mikan was a lot more.

Re: Cousy -- in his prime in the 50s, he carried his team (with good scorers Bill Sharman and Ed Macauley) to 2nd, 3rd, 3rd, and 2nd place finishes in a 4 team conference pre-Russell. With Russell, he had some of the worst playoffs of all time. Is he really better than Frazier? Stockton? Nash? Paul? If so, why?

Re: Pettit - I would counter by noting he played in a tougher era, though, and also note his longevity appears superior (even if we count Mikan's NBL years).

Re: Cousy - I know I'll be championing Cousy sooner than most on this forum. But I do generally agree there's ample room to question whether he belongs ahead of Stockton, Nash, Paul, Frazier (or Kidd, Payton, Isiah, Curry, etc, for that matter).

If you mean easier path to success, you're right. But don't forget that, He played in a 6 feet line game. There was no space to play some quality basketball and more foul per game than field goal made.

Vote: Bob Pettit (my GOAT #3 PF) "Great Years +" "Points": 43.3
Alt: Bob Cousy (my GOAT #3 PG) "Great Years +" "Points": 40
H.M.: Elgin Baylor (my GOAT #4 SF) "Great Years +" "Points": 46.7

These are the only 3 remaining guys with 10 ALL-League First-Team selections - basically a decade of dominating their position.
All 3 revolutionized their position.

I have Pettit over Cousy because I believe his First-Team & 2nd-Team selections are a little more valuable.

I have them both over Elgin because I put one player per position in each descending set of 5 GOAT rankings. So, Elgin's in the next group.

Re: Pettit -- do you really think his impact was close to that of Mikan? I love him and have him as my #5 PF of all time but he was basically Karl Malone in terms of impact. Mikan was a lot more.

Re: Cousy -- in his prime in the 50s, he carried his team (with good scorers Bill Sharman and Ed Macauley) to 2nd, 3rd, 3rd, and 2nd place finishes in a 4 team conference pre-Russell. With Russell, he had some of the worst playoffs of all time. Is he really better than Frazier? Stockton? Nash? Paul? If so, why?

He was definitely much more than Malone, in terms of impact. Pettit and Elgin getting too much underrating on this forum, but they were the best of their era, after the Top 10 Peak/Prime Level Players, Robertson, Chamberlain and Russell.

Pettit had tiers above offensive impact above Malone's. And his defence also arguably better than him. Different tier players, Peak/Prime wise.

[Pablo Novi]

Vote: Bob Pettit (my GOAT #3 PF) "Great Years +" "Points": 43.3
Alt: Bob Cousy (my GOAT #3 PG) "Great Years +" "Points": 40
H.M.: Elgin Baylor (my GOAT #4 SF) "Great Years +" "Points": 46.7

These are the only 3 remaining guys with 10 ALL-League First-Team selections - basically a decade of dominating their position.
All 3 revolutionized their position.

I have Pettit over Cousy because I believe his First-Team & 2nd-Team selections are a little more valuable.

I have them both over Elgin because I put one player per position in each descending set of 5 GOAT rankings. So, Elgin's in the next group.

Re: Pettit -- do you really think his impact was close to that of Mikan? I love him and have him as my #5 PF of all time but he was basically Karl Malone in terms of impact. Mikan was a lot more.

Re: Cousy -- in his prime in the 50s, he carried his team (with good scorers Bill Sharman and Ed Macauley) to 2nd, 3rd, 3rd, and 2nd place finishes in a 4 team conference pre-Russell. With Russell, he had some of the worst playoffs of all time. Is he really better than Frazier? Stockton? Nash? Paul? If so, why?

Re: Pettit - I would counter by noting he played in a tougher era, though, and also note his longevity appears superior (even if we count Mikan's NBL years).

Re: Cousy - I know I'll be championing Cousy sooner than most on this forum. But I do generally agree there's ample room to question whether he belongs ahead of Stockton, Nash, Paul, Frazier (or Kidd, Payton, Isiah, Curry, etc, for that matter).

SUGGESTED MIKAN COMPROMISE: GOAT #25
I have a suggestion re. our collective GOAT ranking of George Mikan:
Why not have him be GOAT #25 ?

Comparing him to other All-Time Greats:
He played ONLY a total of 520 games in his career (plus 91 Play-Off games)
Most of the guys we've voted in, or soon will, played close to twice (or more) as many games.
It is also known and agreed upon that his era was FAR weaker than any since then.
Still he DOMINATED his first 7.3 seasons for 7 Chips (and one broken leg from probably getting all 8).

Therefore, in such a controversial case, why not agree to a compromise (before hand?) and vote him in as GOAT #25?

About Cousy vs such as: Stockton, Nash, Paul, Frazier (or Kidd, Payton, Isiah, Curry.

I was never a huge fan of Cousy's (mostly because his great years happened before I started watching). Still, assuming our main criteria is how a player played AGAINST HIS COMPETITION IN HIS ERA; Cousy was ALL-NBA 1st-Team 10 years - twice as many as Kidd; 2.5 times as many as: CP3, Walt Frazier & Sharman; and at least 3+ times as many as the rest of these other otherwise quite-worthy PGs). That's a tremendous amount more position-wise domination.

Also, we have not as yet included any players who played mostly in the 1950s - that strikes me as a bit unbalanced.

N.B. I treat Jerry West as a SG rather than as a PG. Gail Goodrich, who played with Jerry about half of Jerry's career, said that Gail was the PG and Jerry the SG. Also, Jerry, particularly early on, was not a great assists man (less than 5 apg for his first 5 years, still less than 7 during his next 4 years); but what a shooter!

GOAT PGs:
by Pablo's "GREAT YEARS" "POINTS" Rankings:

#. "PTS"; Name; 1st-Teams; 2nd-Tms (ALL-NBA)
. 1. 49.8 Magic ..... 9 (1st-Tm) - 1 (2nd-Tm)
. 2. 49.0 Big "O" .... 9 - 2
. 3. 40.0 Cousy ... 10 - 2 N.B. Despite Cousy's TEN 1st-Tms, he only has 40 "Pts"; because I've discounted heavily his era.
. 4. 37.8 Stockton .. 2 - 6
. 5. 35.0 Kidd ....... 5 - 1
. 6. 33.8 Paul ....... 4 -3
. 7. 29.8 Payton .... 2 - 5
. 8. 29.3 Nash ...... 3 - 2
. 9. 28.5 A.I. ........ 3 - 3
10. 24.5 Isiah ....... 3 - 2
11. 23.3 Westbrook 2 - 4
12. 22.5 Frazier ... 4 - 2
13. 19.0 Tiny ...... 3 - 2
14. 19.0 Sharman . 4 - 3
15. 17.5 Curry ..... 2 - 2

[penbeast0]

SUGGESTED MIKAN COMPROMISE: GOAT #25
I have a suggestion re. our collective GOAT ranking of George Mikan:
Why not have him be GOAT #25 ?
...

Also, we have not as yet included any players who played mostly in the 1950s - that strikes me as a bit unbalanced.
...

Again, we talked about this in the threads before starting the project and the consensus was that we wanted to rank Mikan (and possibly other players from his era like Mikkelson). So, we should consider them and not automatically dismiss them just due to era. In prior projects, I started the list at the introduction of the 24 second clock because I didn't know whether we could give Mikan a fair hearing; this time we decided to try.

From the 50s, I will vote for Mikan, Pettit, and Arizin before Cousy. They played defense and were more efficient; Cousy was flashy and a big assist man but his consistent record of truly horrific playoff shooting during the Russell years, for a guy who shot a lot, knocks him down a bit in my book.

[Pablo Novi]

SUGGESTED MIKAN COMPROMISE: GOAT #25
I have a suggestion re. our collective GOAT ranking of George Mikan:
Why not have him be GOAT #25 ?
...

Also, we have not as yet included any players who played mostly in the 1950s - that strikes me as a bit unbalanced.
...

Again, we talked about this in the threads before starting the project and the consensus was that we wanted to rank Mikan (and possibly other players from his era like Mikkelson). So, we should consider them and not automatically dismiss them just due to era. In prior projects, I started the list at the introduction of the 24 second clock because I didn't know whether we could give Mikan a fair hearing; this time we decided to try.

From the 50s, I will vote for Mikan, Pettit, and Arizin before Cousy. They played defense and were more efficient; Cousy was flashy and a big assist man but his consistent record of truly horrific playoff shooting during the Russell years, for a guy who shot a lot, knocks him down a bit in my book.

I have nothing but respect for this site, RealGM; and these GOAT threads in particular. The AVERAGE post in these threads is highly educational - often presenting us (me in particular) with information / analysis I've learned stuff from.

I did read the entire two introductory threads having to do with how this discussion should be organized and people's qualifications to post in it. I applaud you-all (us?; if I may include myself) for bringing in the 1950's into the discussion.

I USED TO rank Mikan, Pettit & Arizin (and a host of more-recent players) over Cousy (it didn't hurt that I haven't liked the C's since the early-mid 60s after I experienced several times, in the early-mid 1960s, LIVE at the "Gaaaden", up-close-and-personal their own fans calling Russ (and their other black players) the "N" word.

Still, the way I've come to see things (the last 20 years or so); is that the #1 criteria for COMPARING players from different: eras/decades, positions and Leagues is how much they did (or didn't) dominate their OWN eras/decades and positions.

There's only ever been TEN players who garnered / earned TEN ALL-League 1st-Team selections:
I have 6 of them in my GOAT Top 10: KAJ (10), (Magic "only" had 9), MJ (10), LBJ (11), TD (10), (Wilt,"only" 7, with 2 2nd-Teams behind Russell; imo, definitely THE GOAT ATHLETE of the entire 1900s), (Dr J had "only" 9), Kobe (11), ("O" "only" had 9) & Karl Malone (11).

I have 3 more in my GOAT #s 11-15: (Shaq "only" had 8), Jerry West (10), (Bird "only" had 9), Pettit (10) & Cousy (10).
I have the last of the 10, Elgin Baylor as my GOAT #17 (after Hakeem who "only" had 6).

In other words, in my GOAT Top 17, ALL 15 players who had at least 9 ALL-League 1st-Team selections are included (with the two great Centers: Wilt (7) & Hakeem (6) not far behind in such selections).

I find it incredible that in the exactly EIGHTY YEARS of NBL-NBA-ABA history only TEN MEN have ever racked up TEN 1st-Team selections.
Heck, after these 10 guys, only 8 others got more than 6 1st-Team selections (all already listed in my GOAT Top 17; except for Rick Barry (my GOAT #20) and Mikan (my GOAT #25).

If we broaden the pool to all the players who have had more than "just" 5 ALL-League 1st-Team selections, that's only 22 players. I haven't yet mentioned the three I rank the lowest: Dolph Schayes (6) (I have him GOAT #35); and Robert McDermott (6) & Leroy Edwards (6) both of whom dominated the NBL before Mikan came along (when the seasons had far fewer games & the level of play was a good deal weaker than what Mikan provoked. I give them "honorary" spots: GOAT #99, & GOAT #100.

I came to "advanced stats" a bit late "in the game". I think I have a decent (but certainly not advanced) feel for their strength's and weaknesses - but, imo, for determining "Great Years", they can not and do not trump: ALL-League 1st-Team & 2nd-Team selections.

Whenever I review the ALL-League selections from previous years - that is usually enough (just seeing those 10 names in any given year) for me to recall the general flavor of that whole season). (And I've never seriously found fault with those selections over all these years since 1960).

btw, our collective GOAT list (with the only significant exception being Bill Russell) is quite close, so far, to my personal GOAT list - based on "Great Years" as the #1 criteria - which, imo, tends to indicate that "my" system is pretty darned good.

2-3 threads ago, one of us asked if there was any kind of indicator for how future players might rank in upcoming GOAT lists.
This is another important advantage of "my" system - no new player can get into the GOAT Top 25 or so without racking up at least (at a very minimum) 6 "Great Years"; and, to break into the GOAT Top 15, will require at least NINE "Great Years" (i.e., making NINE ALL-NBA 1st-Teams).

For fans of players old and new; this is, I believe, "comforting" - knowing that the basic "standard" won't change because it doesn't need to change - and that for older-generation players to be bumped downwards, it's gonna take truly rare, once-in-a-decade level players who maintain such excellence for a decade's-worth of seasons.

[Pablo Novi]

"Pettit and Elgin getting too much underrating on this forum, but they were the best of their era, after the Top 10 Peak/Prime Level Players, Robertson, Chamberlain and Russell. "

I couldn't agree with you more.
btw, people here have tended to point out that Elgin didn't supposedly adopt his game to the ever-changing circumstances (though few players ever created more original shots than he did) and/or was a difficult team-mate (but until Wilt joined the Lakers), I never saw any problems between Elgin & Jerry. (I can't claim to know that there were none - especially given how reticient West was to going public with anything - heck he never even wanted to be a team captain).

In terms of PEAK years, Elgin's 1962 is way up there (it gets overlooked due to Wilt's 50.4 ppg and "O"s triple-double. In terms of PRIME - Elgin's 10 consecutive years as a 1st-Team ALL-NBA-er are way up there too.

Likewise, Pettit cranked out 10 Great Years too - (besides he and Elgin, only EIGHT other players have ever had as many).

[penbeast0]

The problem with that is that centers were just plain more valuable than wings/points in the earlier NBA, particularly in the 50s. With the low shooting efficiencies, shots closer to the basket were more valuable, rebounds were more valuable, and the ability to draw fouls were more valuable . . . all things that bigs did at rates appreciably above smaller players. So, the best guard of the 50s is NOT equivalent to the best C of the 50s in terms of how much they help your team win. Just as today, the best scoring center in the league is NOT in the top 5 in the league in scoring impact. Changes in the modern game favor 3 pointers and slashers too much. (Not to say bigs aren't as valuable since, to counter their currently weaker offensive impact, they can have a significantly greater defensive impact than even the best small player -- which was ALSO true in the 50s when centers dominated offensively) At least that's my take.

[feyki]

The problem with that is that centers were just plain more valuable than wings/points in the earlier NBA, particularly in the 50s. With the low shooting efficiencies, shots closer to the basket were more valuable, rebounds were more valuable, and the ability to draw fouls were more valuable . . . all things that bigs did at rates appreciably above smaller players. So, the best guard of the 50s is NOT equivalent to the best C of the 50s in terms of how much they help your team win. Just as today, the best scoring center in the league is NOT in the top 5 in the league in scoring impact. Changes in the modern game favor 3 pointers and slashers too much. (Not to say bigs aren't as valuable since, to counter their currently weaker offensive impact, they can have a significantly greater defensive impact than even the best small player -- which was ALSO true in the 50s when centers dominated offensively) At least that's my take.

I disagree. Davies was the best player in the world through, from 46 or 47 to 51 or 52, besides Mikan. And There were many guards to dominate the Top Basketball League as ABL, NBL and Early 50's. Even Center was a so-so position before Mikan. Forwards were more dominant, but I don't say what you said.