RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #1 (LeBron James)

[70sFan]

Well that's the thing with having your bigman be the focal point of the offense: if you can't get him the ball, the entire offense can be neutered! I'm not blaming him for not having help, I'm merely describing the inherent disadvantages that come with a center being your offensive centerpiece, as opposed to a guard who can get to any spot on the floor. Besides, I had 74, 77, and 80 KAJ in tier 1 and 79 KAJ in tier 2. He just didn't really play well in 78.

One thing - Lakers struggle with their defense, not offense against Nuggets. I wouldn't put much blame on Kareem because of that, he had very strong defense performance then but was surrounded by mediocre defenders (especially on perimeter).

Edit: I forgot to mention that Jamaal Wilkes was decent defender, but he played out of position at PF.

[Odinn21]

Is it OK to post vote tally?

[Owly]

And if I'm considering era transportation in all fairness, I also believe that a Russell that matriculated in this era would have developed his jumper enough to be a plus offensive player in this generation as well...perhaps even an elite one. Because that's what the current game requires, he had the tools and work ethic to put in the work, and he had the innate basketball IQ to recognize where that work needed to happen.

Doesn't matter to me because I'm not about time machine stuff but it seems ... generous ... to allow his jumper to improve quite significantly (especially if offense getting to elite range ... when his own offenses were bad ... and I'd posit he wasn't without offensive talent though the detail on the quality of those casts is a thorny issue) to get a .561 free throw shooter to ... whatever level (how much does that need to improve to get to a level where you're unhappy [edit: as a defense] with him taking low/no contest 15 footers (or beyond) ... to .700?). He's not Dudley, Montross territory, but he has the 18th worst (RS) FT% of all-time NBA or ABA history among those taking 1000 or more (would have preferred a miss threshold so nobody got left off for having too few makes but ...). Then too on the limited footage and fg data we have it doesn't seem to provide a contradictory picture.

Of course his offensive rebounding would be huge. Some people are into his passing (on limited info, I am less so, in light of the offenses).

I'm not sure the IQ can necessarily make it happen. Nor fwiw, am I as sold on his work ethic as noteworthy for practice (often didn't practice ... and to be fair he played huge minutes and in a bad travel era ... I guess maybe it comes before getting to the pros ...).

Maybe it depends how you play time travel which is why generally I don't, but Russell with a J seems like a stretch to me.

[Blackmill]

So, if I put together a player with the natural physical tools of a megatron Anthony Davis with the mental acuity to think the game at least as well as LeBron, I find it hard to believe that such a player wouldn't, in his formative years of the 1990s/early 2000s (let's say), have evaluated the game-as-it-was and spent more time working on his perimeter skills and shooting. His shooting in the reality-that-was was very poor, so I can't just postulate that he would have been Dirk in this era. But could he have developed a reasonable jump shot to buttress his his already strong (for the era) ballhandling, passing game and decision making? Could he have grown up watching men of similar body type like Chris Webber and Kevin Garnett and saw them as his offensive template, while still turning in a defensive impact that tops what is possible in the current game?

Yes, I believe he could.

I think it's fair to assume Russell would spend more time honing his perimeter offense. That said, I recall accounts of players like Shaq and Dwight practicing their free throws at length, but to no success. Is there a specific reason you are optimistic that Russell would develop an outside shot? My impression is effort and smarts only go so far to improving a player's shot. A lot of it comes naturally just like Russell's defensive decision making came naturally. I could be wrong but that's what I've gathered.

Also, 70sfan made a comparison between Bam and how Russell might play in today's game on offense. I like this comparison. Do you have any thoughts on Bam as a proxy for modern day Russell on offense?

[70sFan]

So, if I put together a player with the natural physical tools of a megatron Anthony Davis with the mental acuity to think the game at least as well as LeBron, I find it hard to believe that such a player wouldn't, in his formative years of the 1990s/early 2000s (let's say), have evaluated the game-as-it-was and spent more time working on his perimeter skills and shooting. His shooting in the reality-that-was was very poor, so I can't just postulate that he would have been Dirk in this era. But could he have developed a reasonable jump shot to buttress his his already strong (for the era) ballhandling, passing game and decision making? Could he have grown up watching men of similar body type like Chris Webber and Kevin Garnett and saw them as his offensive template, while still turning in a defensive impact that tops what is possible in the current game?

Yes, I believe he could.

I think it's fair to assume Russell would spend more time honing his perimeter offense. That said, I recall accounts of players like Shaq and Dwight practicing their free throws at length, but to no success. Is there a specific reason you are optimistic that Russell would develop an outside shot? My impression is effort and smarts only go so far to improving a player's shot. A lot of it comes naturally just like Russell's defensive decision making came naturally. I could be wrong but that's what I've gathered.

Also, 70sfan made a comparison between Bam and how Russell might play in today's game on offense. I like this comparison. Do you have any thoughts on Bam as a proxy for modern day Russell on offense?

Russell actually was willing to shoot from midrange, I've seen a lot of short midrange attempts from him (around FT line) when I started to collect footage from that era. I doubt he was efficient shooter though.

I think that Bam-level shooter would be his ceilling, but he was also far more athletic so his driving game would be probably more dangerous. He also had acceptable post player while Bam is terrible one.

I think that looking at peak Russell as slightly better offensive version of Bam is fair. We have to remember that Russell peaked as good offensive player in the early 1960s.

[Bidofo]

Well that's the thing with having your bigman be the focal point of the offense: if you can't get him the ball, the entire offense can be neutered! I'm not blaming him for not having help, I'm merely describing the inherent disadvantages that come with a center being your offensive centerpiece, as opposed to a guard who can get to any spot on the floor. Besides, I had 74, 77, and 80 KAJ in tier 1 and 79 KAJ in tier 2. He just didn't really play well in 78.

One thing - Lakers struggle with their defense, not offense against Nuggets. I wouldn't put much blame on Kareem because of that, he had very strong defense performance then but was surrounded by mediocre defenders (especially on perimeter).

Edit: I forgot to mention that Jamaal Wilkes was decent defender, but he played out of position at PF.

Bit confused about which year you're talking about. I agree, 79 KAJ was great and him dominating the Nuggets is part of why that year was tier 2. Do you think it's a season that deserves to be compared with 74/77/80?

If you meant 78 KAJ vs the Sonics (since I did criticize his defense that series in my first post), that's some context into his defense that I was hoping to get, so thank you. What about his defense was so good that series? And how good is "very strong"? Are we talking Hakeem-level or more so Dwight-level?

[Owly]

So, if I put together a player with the natural physical tools of a megatron Anthony Davis with the mental acuity to think the game at least as well as LeBron, I find it hard to believe that such a player wouldn't, in his formative years of the 1990s/early 2000s (let's say), have evaluated the game-as-it-was and spent more time working on his perimeter skills and shooting. His shooting in the reality-that-was was very poor, so I can't just postulate that he would have been Dirk in this era. But could he have developed a reasonable jump shot to buttress his his already strong (for the era) ballhandling, passing game and decision making? Could he have grown up watching men of similar body type like Chris Webber and Kevin Garnett and saw them as his offensive template, while still turning in a defensive impact that tops what is possible in the current game?

Yes, I believe he could.

I think it's fair to assume Russell would spend more time honing his perimeter offense. That said, I recall accounts of players like Shaq and Dwight practicing their free throws at length, but to no success. Is there a specific reason you are optimistic that Russell would develop an outside shot? My impression is effort and smarts only go so far to improving a player's shot. A lot of it comes naturally just like Russell's defensive decision making came naturally. I could be wrong but that's what I've gathered.

Also, 70sfan made a comparison between Bam and how Russell might play in today's game on offense. I like this comparison. Do you have any thoughts on Bam as a proxy for modern day Russell on offense?

Russell actually was willing to shoot from midrange, I've seen a lot of short midrange attempts from him (around FT line) when I started to collect footage from that era. I doubt he was efficient shooter though.

I think that Bam-level shooter would be his ceilling, but he was also far more athletic so his driving game would be probably more dangerous. He also had acceptable post player while Bam is terrible one.

I think that looking at peak Russell as slightly better offensive version of Bam is fair. We have to remember that Russell peaked as good offensive player in the early 1960s.

How confident are you in this?

Through the 60s he was typically both either the, or near the (a) worst ts% "starting" (i.e. big minutes) center and (b) lowest usage "starting" center in a given year (Thurmond starts taking TS% at the back end of the decade).

And the offenses weren't good.

I'm open to being wrong but I've always leaned cynical on Russell's offense (specifically the scoring/passing sides).

[ZeppelinPage]

I think it's fair to assume Russell would spend more time honing his perimeter offense. That said, I recall accounts of players like Shaq and Dwight practicing their free throws at length, but to no success. Is there a specific reason you are optimistic that Russell would develop an outside shot? My impression is effort and smarts only go so far to improving a player's shot. A lot of it comes naturally just like Russell's defensive decision making came naturally. I could be wrong but that's what I've gathered.

Also, 70sfan made a comparison between Bam and how Russell might play in today's game on offense. I like this comparison. Do you have any thoughts on Bam as a proxy for modern day Russell on offense?

Russell actually was willing to shoot from midrange, I've seen a lot of short midrange attempts from him (around FT line) when I started to collect footage from that era. I doubt he was efficient shooter though.

I think that Bam-level shooter would be his ceilling, but he was also far more athletic so his driving game would be probably more dangerous. He also had acceptable post player while Bam is terrible one.

I think that looking at peak Russell as slightly better offensive version of Bam is fair. We have to remember that Russell peaked as good offensive player in the early 1960s.

How confident are you in this?

Through the 60s he was typically both either the, or near the (a) worst ts% "starting" (i.e. big minutes) center and (b) lowest usage "starting" center in a given year (Thurmond starts taking TS% at the back end of the decade).

And the offenses weren't good.

I'm open to being wrong but I've always leaned cynical on Russell's offense (specifically the scoring/passing sides).

As far as passing goes, I think it's important to remember a good amount of his assists were hand-offs and pass outs. I also hand-tracked his TOV% off available game footage and it came out to 23.3%, which was definitely not good for the amount he was getting the ball. Probably also helps to explain why the Celtic offenses got worse.

[2klegend]

#1 Jordan
#2 Lebron
#3 Kareem

MJ is still the GOAT. I analyze based on the importance of peak, 7 years prime, and accolades given the circumstance each player is in. Not too many guys have a COMPLETE PEAK like '91 Jordan where his regular-season and postseason play, capped off with a title.

Then you consider the 5-7 years prime are unmatch with the consistency. Lebron is the only one close to matching MJ's peak and prime dominant but lacks the accomplishment within that time frame. The legacy of Jordan is a perfect combination of sheer talent, skill, and his determination to win at all cost. That has not been replicated ever since.

[70sFan]

Well that's the thing with having your bigman be the focal point of the offense: if you can't get him the ball, the entire offense can be neutered! I'm not blaming him for not having help, I'm merely describing the inherent disadvantages that come with a center being your offensive centerpiece, as opposed to a guard who can get to any spot on the floor. Besides, I had 74, 77, and 80 KAJ in tier 1 and 79 KAJ in tier 2. He just didn't really play well in 78.

One thing - Lakers struggle with their defense, not offense against Nuggets. I wouldn't put much blame on Kareem because of that, he had very strong defense performance then but was surrounded by mediocre defenders (especially on perimeter).

Edit: I forgot to mention that Jamaal Wilkes was decent defender, but he played out of position at PF.

Bit confused about which year you're talking about. I agree, 79 KAJ was great and him dominating the Nuggets is part of why that year was tier 2. Do you think it's a season that deserves to be compared with 74/77/80?

If you meant 78 KAJ vs the Sonics (since I did criticize his defense that series in my first post), that's some context into his defense that I was hoping to get, so thank you. What about his defense was so good that series? And how good is "very strong"? Are we talking Hakeem-level or more so Dwight-level?

I meant Sonics, not Nuggets of course. Sorry for that mistake.

I was talking about 1978. I think that his defense was still very strong in that series. The laziest argument is him posting 4 bpg, but we all know that's not enough to make a case for him. Instead, I'll try to break down one of his games from that series with video examples:

Watch on YouTube

3:00 - good help defense and amazing block, showcasting how underrated Kareem's length is (also, look how Wilkes didn't box out Sikma just a few seconds later).
4:53 - good post defense, Webster made a tough fadeaway shot
8:14 - another very good contest in the post against Webster
9:14 - late help defense, that's not a good play
9:54 - another example of Kareem's length, great block
14:50 - smart double team
15:24 - sound drop coverage on P&R
15:48 - decent contest. but a bit weak one this time
16:45 - good help rotation and contest, better finish by DJ
19:30 - not a defensive possession, but what an outlet pass!
19:55 - one thing I don't like in Kareem's defense is that he sometimes didn't get back to defense, especially when he made a mistake on offense (like here)
23:33 - another solid post defense
25:00 - very good defense on P&R, both by Kareem and Wilkes - this play shows that Kareem still was quite light on his feet despite his size and age
38:22 - steal from entry pass to Sikma
53:03 - nice fake by Sikma, Kareem was too slow here
54:40 - he switched on Brown (sharpshooter of that era) and stayed in front of him for the whole action, forcing him to give away the ball. On negative note, he switched again to Sikma a bit too late and was out of position for rebound (Sikma scored on a putback)

I see Kareem having strong first half performance on defense (he struggled a bit offensively, but that's another debate). He contested shots inside and was mobile enough on perimeter. I like how he defended P&Rs as well. He had some weaker plays and soft contests, but overall he wasn't a problem. The problem was that Lakers guards couldn't guard Gus/Freddie and nobody on this team outside of Dantley boxed out well (especially DJ took advantage of that in this half).

As a sidenote:
58:22 - pause the game here and look how Sonics defended Jabbar here. Nobody will convince me that Kareem didn't face soft doubles and zones, Sonics just packed the paint and it was easier to do than now.


If anybody wants me to do the same with the second half, please let me know. If anybody disagree with my notes, also let me know

[70sFan]

Russell actually was willing to shoot from midrange, I've seen a lot of short midrange attempts from him (around FT line) when I started to collect footage from that era. I doubt he was efficient shooter though.

I think that Bam-level shooter would be his ceilling, but he was also far more athletic so his driving game would be probably more dangerous. He also had acceptable post player while Bam is terrible one.

I think that looking at peak Russell as slightly better offensive version of Bam is fair. We have to remember that Russell peaked as good offensive player in the early 1960s.

How confident are you in this?

Through the 60s he was typically both either the, or near the (a) worst ts% "starting" (i.e. big minutes) center and (b) lowest usage "starting" center in a given year (Thurmond starts taking TS% at the back end of the decade).

And the offenses weren't good.

I'm open to being wrong but I've always leaned cynical on Russell's offense (specifically the scoring/passing sides).

As far as passing goes, I think it's important to remember a good amount of his assists were hand-offs and pass outs. I also hand-tracked his TOV% off available game footage and it came out to 23.3%, which was definitely not good for the amount he was getting the ball. Probably also helps to explain why the Celtic offenses got worse.

To Owly:

I'm not super-confident, but given how he improved his offensive production in postseason I think he was a positive on that end overall (but definitely not huge). Mind you that I'm talking about 1960-63 Russell, not later versions.

To ZeppelinPage:

I think that your TOV% is unreasonably high, I think that he was a bit turnover prone but this would give him among the worst players ever in that aspect.

...

You've made a huge work on Russell games available recently, could you calculate his adjusted TOV% based on this sample?

[freethedevil]

1) Outside of Spoelstra, mediocre coaches

This is one of the things I don't like about James TBH. He's not entirely uncoachable. But he also is not someone like Kareem, Bill or Timmy.
David Blatt is one hell of a coach. And James wanted him out ASAP, he didn't even wait to see how well they'd together.
The only reason Spoelstra gets to mentioned like this is Riley stuck to his gun with the coach. James also wanted him gone even before the All-Star break.

Jordan literally tired to get jackson fired for implementing the triangle. FFS.

[70sFan]

1) Outside of Spoelstra, mediocre coaches

This is one of the things I don't like about James TBH. He's not entirely uncoachable. But he also is not someone like Kareem, Bill or Timmy.
David Blatt is one hell of a coach. And James wanted him out ASAP, he didn't even wait to see how well they'd together.
The only reason Spoelstra gets to mentioned like this is Riley stuck to his gun with the coach. James also wanted him gone even before the All-Star break.

Jordan literally tired to get jackson fired for implementing the triangle. FFS.

Odinn21 didn't mention Jordan though.

[freethedevil]

This is one of the things I don't like about James TBH. He's not entirely uncoachable. But he also is not someone like Kareem, Bill or Timmy.
David Blatt is one hell of a coach. And James wanted him out ASAP, he didn't even wait to see how well they'd together.
The only reason Spoelstra gets to mentioned like this is Riley stuck to his gun with the coach. James also wanted him gone even before the All-Star break.

Jordan literally tired to get jackson fired for implementing the triangle. FFS.

Odinn21 didn't mention Jordan though.

Didn't oddnin had jordan and kareem higher? Seems like a blatant inconsistency to knock lebron for uncoachability when jordan was railign against the triangle and Kareem tried to get magic kicked for the team shifting away from himself as the focus.

[70sFan]

Jordan literally tired to get jackson fired for implementing the triangle. FFS.

Odinn21 didn't mention Jordan though.

Didn't oddnin had jordan and kareem higher? Seems like a blatant inconsistency to knock lebron for uncoachability when jordan was railign against the triangle and Kareem tried to get magic kicked for the team shifting away from himself as the focus.

I can't speak for Oddin of course. When did Kareem do that though? I know he respected Westhead as a coach and was against firing him, but other than that I don't remember him giving any significant off-court problems for Showtime Lakers. I could be wrong though, as I'm not off-court guy.

[2klegend]

Let me compare the 3 players I list as GOAT.

PEAK
'91 Jordan
'12 Lebron
-72 Kareem

Code: Select all

                           OBPM    DBPM    PER      TS%       WS48
LG Avg                     7.415   5.379   28.365   0.618    0.269
Standard Deviation         4.046   5.577   1.058    48.510   111.384
PT Value                   30      30      30       30       30

LG Avg = All-Time leader's league average for reach respective statistical category.
Standard Deviation = Avg player standard
PT Value = Each statistical category assigns a 30PTS as maximum.

RoundPlay Coef
1st Round = 1.6 Conf Final = 1.2
2nd Round = 1.4 Final = 1


my formula ...
REG play score = ((Player PER x PERLgAvg)+(PLayer TS x TSLgAvg)+(Player WS48 x WS48LgAvg )+(Player OBPM x OBPMLgAvg)+(Player DBPM x DBPMLgAvg))/((GamePlay Coef))

POS play score = ((Player PER x PERLgAvg)+(PLayer TS x TSLgAvg)+(Player WS48 x WS48LgAvg )+(Player OBPM x OBPMLgAvg)+(Player DBPM x DBPMLgAvg))/((RoundPlay Coef))

PEAK value = AVG (REG + POS)

'91 Jordan Peak
REG = ((31.6*PERLgAvg)+(0.605*TSLgAvg)+(0.321*WS48LgAvg )+(8.9*OBPMLgAvg)+(1.8*DBPMLgAvg))/(1)
= 144.569
POS = ((32*PERLgAvg)+(0.6*TSLgAvg)+(0.333*WS48LgAvg )+(10.8*OBPMLgAvg)+(3*DBPMLgAvg))/(1)
=160.465

Jordan Peak: 152.517

Lebron '12
REG = ((30.7*PERLgAvg)+(0.605*TSLgAvg)+(0.298*WS48LgAvg )+(8.2*OBPMLgAvg)+(2.7*DBPMLgAvg))/(1)
=143.243
POS =((30.3*PERLgAvg)+(0.576*TSLgAvg)+(0.284*WS48LgAvg )+(8.1*OBPMLgAvg)+(2.5*DBPMLgAvg))/(1)
=138.334

Lebron Peak: 140.788

Kareem '77
REG = ((27.8*PERLgAvg)+(0.608*TSLgAvg)+(0.283*WS48LgAvg )+(7.7*OBPMLgAvg)+(3*DBPMLgAvg))/(1)
=138.301
POS=((32.4*PERLgAvg)+(0.646*TSLgAvg)+(0.332*WS48LgAvg )+(11*OBPMLgAvg)+(3.8*DBPMLgAvg))/(1.4)
=120.200

Kareem Peak: 129.250

------------------------------------------------------

7-years PRIME

Lebron James 08, 09, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14
REG = (AVERAGE(29.1,31.7,31.1,27.3,30.7,31.6,29.3)*PERLgAvg+AVERAGE(0.568,0.591,0.604,0.594,0.605,0.64,0.649)*TSLgAvg+AVERAGE(0.242,0.318,0.299,0.244,0.298,0.322,0.264)*WS48LgAvg+AVERAGE(9,9.4,9.7,6.5,8.3,9.2,8)*OBPMLgAvg+AVERAGE(2.6,3.6,2.8,2.1,2.7,2.4,0.9)*DBPMLgAvg)/(1)
=141.285

Lebron's PRIME SCORE: =141.285

Michael Jordan 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 96
REG = (AVERAGE(31.7,31.1,31.2,31.6,27.7,29.7,29.4)*PERLgAvg+AVERAGE(0.603,0.614,0.606,0.605,0.579,0.564,0.582)*TSLgAvg+AVERAGE(0.308,0.292,0.285,0.321,0.274,0.27,0.317)*WS48LgAvg+AVERAGE(9.8,9.8,9.7,8.9,6.9,8.3,7.2)*OBPMLgAvg+AVERAGE(2.3,2.7,0.8,1.8,1.7,1.2,1.4)*DBPMLgAvg)/(1)
=138.267

Jordan PRIME SCORE: 138.267


Kareem Abdul Jabbar 72, 73, 74, 76, 77, 79, 80
REG=(AVERAGE(29.9,28.5,24.4,27.2,27.8,25.5,25.3)*PERLgAvg+AVERAGE(0.603,0.58,0.564,0.567,0.608,0.612,0.639)*TSLgAvg+AVERAGE(0.34,0.322,0.25,0.242,0.283,0.219,0.227)*WS48LgAvg+AVERAGE(OBPMLgAvg,OBPMLgAvg,4.9,6.2,7.7,3.9,4)*OBPMLgAvg+AVERAGE(DBPMLgAvg,DBPMLgAvg,3.6,4,3,3.9,2.7)*DBPMLgAvg)/(1)
=130.075

Kareem PRIME SCORE: 130.075

Jordan's Peak + Jordan's Prime
= 152.517 + 138.267
=290.784

Lebron's Peak + Lebron's Prime
=140.788 + 141.285
=282.073

Kareem's Peak + Kareem's Prime
=129.250 + 130.075
=259.325

[Joao Saraiva]

#1 Jordan
#2 Lebron
#3 Kareem

MJ is still the GOAT. I analyze based on the importance of peak, 7 years prime, and accolades given the circumstance each player is in. Not too many guys have a COMPLETE PEAK like '91 Jordan where his regular-season and postseason play, capped off with a title.

Then you consider the 5-7 years prime are unmatch with the consistency. Lebron is the only one close to matching MJ's peak and prime dominant but lacks the accomplishment within that time frame. The legacy of Jordan is a perfect combination of sheer talent, skill, and his determination to win at all cost. That has not been replicated ever since.

Running your formula doesn't have James #1 yet?

I saw the results in 2016. The longevity gap has gona wider, LBJ put 1 more FMVP, and probably the prime calculation can add at least 17 and 18 seasons with it.

I see you put 12 LBJ as the peak... 09 was giving trouble?

[2klegend]

#1 Jordan
#2 Lebron
#3 Kareem

MJ is still the GOAT. I analyze based on the importance of peak, 7 years prime, and accolades given the circumstance each player is in. Not too many guys have a COMPLETE PEAK like '91 Jordan where his regular-season and postseason play, capped off with a title.

Then you consider the 5-7 years prime are unmatch with the consistency. Lebron is the only one close to matching MJ's peak and prime dominant but lacks the accomplishment within that time frame. The legacy of Jordan is a perfect combination of sheer talent, skill, and his determination to win at all cost. That has not been replicated ever since.

Running your formula doesn't have James #1 yet?

I saw the results in 2016. The longevity gap has gona wider, LBJ put 1 more FMVP, and probably the prime calculation can add at least 17 and 18 seasons with it.

I see you put 12 LBJ as the peak... 09 was giving trouble?

I have to make an adjustment to Lebron's peak year which I believe is 2012, and not the anomaly 2009. Other than that with the new accolades stack up, he had surpassed Kareem but still fell short of Jordan total. Though, 1 more MVP and 1 more Title will put Lebron edge and edge with Jordan from my projection.

[limbo]

Kind of weird listing LeBron's 7 year prime as 2008-2014 and putting it up against Jordan's best 7 years when a lot of people on this board consider 2016-2018 to be peak LeBron... And then you have 2020 which is also definitely up there somewhere.

[Sublime187]

#1 Jordan
#2 Lebron
#3 Kareem

MJ is still the GOAT. I analyze based on the importance of peak, 7 years prime, and accolades given the circumstance each player is in. Not too many guys have a COMPLETE PEAK like '91 Jordan where his regular-season and postseason play, capped off with a title.

Then you consider the 5-7 years prime are unmatch with the consistency. Lebron is the only one close to matching MJ's peak and prime dominant but lacks the accomplishment within that time frame. The legacy of Jordan is a perfect combination of sheer talent, skill, and his determination to win at all cost. That has not been replicated ever since.

Running your formula doesn't have James #1 yet?

I saw the results in 2016. The longevity gap has gona wider, LBJ put 1 more FMVP, and probably the prime calculation can add at least 17 and 18 seasons with it.

I see you put 12 LBJ as the peak... 09 was giving trouble?

Lol!