ESPN Ranks Their All-time 74 Greatest Players
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
kwase
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 21 Mar 2008
Posts: 2569

PostPosted: Wed May 20, 2020 6:31 pm    Post subject:

http://www.espn.com/video/clip?id=29202410


When they do these lists they need to only allow ex and current players to vote. When the media gets involved it becomes nothing more than propaganda and making people happy so they can have access. Paul Pierce's top 5 makes much more sense IMO.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
P.K.
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 10 Jul 2003
Posts: 24133

PostPosted: Wed May 20, 2020 7:26 pm    Post subject:

about 8 years ago the generally agreed list was

MJ, (#2) Magic, (3)KAJ, Russell, Bird, (6)Wilt, (7)Duncan, (8)Kobe, (9) Shaq, LBJ, Oscar/Hakeem

At that time, the only thing that'd changed on that list from previous versions was LBJ breaking the top 10. LBJ has steadily climbed up these lists since then. Almost all of them have him #2 now.

ESPN's 10 today:
MJ, LBJ, KAJ, Russell, Magic, Wilt, Bird, TD, Kobe, Shaq

CBS Sports updated their list a couple of weeks ago also
MJ, LBJ, KAJ, Russell, (5)Magic, Wilt, Shaq, Bird, (9)Duncan, Kobe, Hakeem, Oscar, Steph, Dr J, Jerry West

https://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/top-15-players-in-nba-history-cbs-sports-ranks-the-greatest-of-all-time-from-west-and-steph-to-lebron-and-mj/

There was an interesting article a couple of years ago that said that LBJ's climb up the list was coming at the expense of Kobe and also Bird.
From these latest couple of lists, LBJ also seems to be affecting Magic...who's seemingly fallen from a consensus #2 all the way to 4th-6th.
_________________
LBJ + AD = More rings
Never argue with a fool - listeners can't tell you apart
Wilt's unstoppable fadeaway: www.youtube.com/watch?v=8O9MgNfcGJA
NPZ's Magic Johnson mix: www.youtube.com/watch?v=q8Qbo0WqvOI
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
1hu2ren3dui4
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 19 Jul 2002
Posts: 15382
Location: Oak Park

PostPosted: Wed May 20, 2020 7:37 pm    Post subject:

FrankUnderwood wrote:
1. Kobe Bryant
2. Michael Jordan
3. Magic Johnson
4. Kareem Abdul Jabaar
5. Lebron James
6. Larry Bird
7. Shaq Oneal
8. Wilt Chamberlain
9. Tim Duncan
10. Hakeem Olajuwon


I second this list. I’d definitely have Hakeem in my top 10. He was just such an elegant and multi tooled player. If Kobe was a big man he would be Hakeem.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
alleyoop
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 08 Feb 2018
Posts: 1586

PostPosted: Wed May 20, 2020 11:25 pm    Post subject:

I'm as big a Kobe fan as there is, but 8-10 is the right spot for him IMO

1: Jordan
2: LeBron
3: Kareem
4: Magic
5/6: Russell/Wilt (can't split)
7: Bird
8: Shaq
9: Kobe
10: Duncan
_________________
Do it for Kobe Bean
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
moonriver24
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 21 Oct 2007
Posts: 15156

PostPosted: Wed May 20, 2020 11:54 pm    Post subject:

If you look at Mj, Kobe, Kareem, Magic, Bron, and Bird ... they all had won with talents surrounding them. But you will see who had won with lesser talents among them.

You dont need a complicated analysis to find out who.
_________________
Kobe's Top 5 Dunks, 81 points, MJ last gm @Staples
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 137258
Location: The Gold Coast

PostPosted: Thu May 21, 2020 7:19 am    Post subject:

moonriver24 wrote:
If you look at Mj, Kobe, Kareem, Magic, Bron, and Bird ... they all had won with talents surrounding them. But you will see who had won with lesser talents among them.

You dont need a complicated analysis to find out who.


No one won with lesser talent around them. Dirk might come the closest.
_________________
“I loved playing music to his words” - John Densmore on Jim Morrison
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
EZ-Ryder
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 11 Jul 2013
Posts: 688

PostPosted: Thu May 21, 2020 7:27 am    Post subject:

danzag wrote:
Duncan ahead of Kobe lol


Not that I agree with it being a Lakers fan, but I think that is starting to become the general consensus at this point.

It seems like most lists have Duncan ahead of Kobe, and most other message boards I read have users also having Duncan over Kobe. Even though my own list has Kobe ranked higher, if you look at the accolades and numbers, a genuine argument can be made for Duncan over Kobe.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 137258
Location: The Gold Coast

PostPosted: Thu May 21, 2020 7:31 am    Post subject:

I would still have Kobe over Duncan, and TD is my favorite player the past 20 years. Something like this, subject to change daily.

Kareem
Jordan
Magic
Russell
Kobe
Duncan
Lebron
Hakeem
West
Shaq
_________________
“I loved playing music to his words” - John Densmore on Jim Morrison
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
EZ-Ryder
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 11 Jul 2013
Posts: 688

PostPosted: Thu May 21, 2020 7:35 am    Post subject:

ArminNBA wrote:
If these lists were honest, they wouldn't be presented as a "Rank of the All-Time Greatest Players," but rather as a "Rank of the All-Time Favorite Narratives."

It's quite clear that Jordan, Kobe, and LeBron are the greatest basketball PLAYERS of all time.

In my view, Jordan and Kobe are a tier ahead of LeBron in terms of sustained play as a complete basketball player.

LeBron, in my view, ultimately unlocked nearly every facet of the game, but he has never quite been the complete package all at once - whether it was being a subpar defender early in his career (and abandoning defense again during his Cavs stint) to being a subpar outside shooter until his latter career improvement as an outside shooter to his fairly consistent woes at the stripe. However, LeBron has almost always been utterly dominant and possessed incredible passing and at-rim scoring skills.

Kobe and Jordan possessed the complete package as basketball PLAYERS for a fairly long stretch - at-rim scoring to outside scoring (and everywhere in between), strong team and individual defense, all-time great footwork, excellent passing skills, elite rebounding guards (who could box out a big when needed), brilliant post play, supremely high basketball IQ, et al. And they were also dominant, which is an important compliment to owning the complete skill set.

But these lists aren't really about assessing basketball players in terms of "play," it's about narrative and likability and awards. It's why Duncan and Bird always end up ahead of Kobe on these lists despite not having a strong argument against him (unlike LeBron or KAJ or Magic who have legitimate cases to be made).


To be fair, this isn't a great take. You're clearly writing this with huge favoritism. Lebron isn't complete because he plays bad defense later in his career, but Kobe is complete because of superior footwork? Lebron was an inconsistent free throw shooter, but Kobe has a high basketball IQ? These comparisons for consistency make zero sense.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 29357

PostPosted: Thu May 21, 2020 8:50 am    Post subject:

EZ-Ryder wrote:
ArminNBA wrote:
If these lists were honest, they wouldn't be presented as a "Rank of the All-Time Greatest Players," but rather as a "Rank of the All-Time Favorite Narratives."

It's quite clear that Jordan, Kobe, and LeBron are the greatest basketball PLAYERS of all time.

In my view, Jordan and Kobe are a tier ahead of LeBron in terms of sustained play as a complete basketball player.

LeBron, in my view, ultimately unlocked nearly every facet of the game, but he has never quite been the complete package all at once - whether it was being a subpar defender early in his career (and abandoning defense again during his Cavs stint) to being a subpar outside shooter until his latter career improvement as an outside shooter to his fairly consistent woes at the stripe. However, LeBron has almost always been utterly dominant and possessed incredible passing and at-rim scoring skills.

Kobe and Jordan possessed the complete package as basketball PLAYERS for a fairly long stretch - at-rim scoring to outside scoring (and everywhere in between), strong team and individual defense, all-time great footwork, excellent passing skills, elite rebounding guards (who could box out a big when needed), brilliant post play, supremely high basketball IQ, et al. And they were also dominant, which is an important compliment to owning the complete skill set.

But these lists aren't really about assessing basketball players in terms of "play," it's about narrative and likability and awards. It's why Duncan and Bird always end up ahead of Kobe on these lists despite not having a strong argument against him (unlike LeBron or KAJ or Magic who have legitimate cases to be made).


To be fair, this isn't a great take. You're clearly writing this with huge favoritism. Lebron isn't complete because he plays bad defense later in his career, but Kobe is complete because of superior footwork? Lebron was an inconsistent free throw shooter, but Kobe has a high basketball IQ? These comparisons for consistency make zero sense.



All the usual suspects on the top 10 list had amazing careers. When I rank them, there's some logic behind it, and some emotional "hell if I know" why I choose one guy above the other.

I'd say that's the case for most people. When people justify their rankings, I virtually never think that the justifications they provide were the reasons they made their choices in the first place. And so the justifications are usually arbitrary, because our rankings are too -- we just don't want to admit it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ArminNBA
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 20 Sep 2008
Posts: 1459

PostPosted: Thu May 21, 2020 9:01 am    Post subject:

EZ-Ryder wrote:
ArminNBA wrote:
If these lists were honest, they wouldn't be presented as a "Rank of the All-Time Greatest Players," but rather as a "Rank of the All-Time Favorite Narratives."

It's quite clear that Jordan, Kobe, and LeBron are the greatest basketball PLAYERS of all time.

In my view, Jordan and Kobe are a tier ahead of LeBron in terms of sustained play as a complete basketball player.

LeBron, in my view, ultimately unlocked nearly every facet of the game, but he has never quite been the complete package all at once - whether it was being a subpar defender early in his career (and abandoning defense again during his Cavs stint) to being a subpar outside shooter until his latter career improvement as an outside shooter to his fairly consistent woes at the stripe. However, LeBron has almost always been utterly dominant and possessed incredible passing and at-rim scoring skills.

Kobe and Jordan possessed the complete package as basketball PLAYERS for a fairly long stretch - at-rim scoring to outside scoring (and everywhere in between), strong team and individual defense, all-time great footwork, excellent passing skills, elite rebounding guards (who could box out a big when needed), brilliant post play, supremely high basketball IQ, et al. And they were also dominant, which is an important compliment to owning the complete skill set.

But these lists aren't really about assessing basketball players in terms of "play," it's about narrative and likability and awards. It's why Duncan and Bird always end up ahead of Kobe on these lists despite not having a strong argument against him (unlike LeBron or KAJ or Magic who have legitimate cases to be made).


To be fair, this isn't a great take. You're clearly writing this with huge favoritism. Lebron isn't complete because he plays bad defense later in his career, but Kobe is complete because of superior footwork? Lebron was an inconsistent free throw shooter, but Kobe has a high basketball IQ? These comparisons for consistency make zero sense.


What? Let me try to decipher what you're saying. You believe I'm saying Kobe had a high basketball IQ and LeBron didn't? That's not what I said. I went on a longer rundown of Jordan and Kobe's skills, but it doesn't imply LeBron didn't own many of these skills.

For one, I was attempting to go for brevity - a true analysis of their game would requires many thousands of more words.

If you want me to expound a bit further, it's not that LeBron "isn't complete because he plays bad defense later in his career." In my view, LeBron did not own the complete package, all at the same time, for a prolonged period of time in his career. Let's run through some examples:

- 03-08: peak athleticism, dominant at-rim finish, elite passing, etc., but porous defense, poor midrange and 3pt game, no post game, unrefined post moves/footwork, etc.
- 09-14: athleticism still at peak level, dominant at-rim, elite passing, excellent team defender, improved 3pt and post game, etc., but still an unreliable to poor midrange shooter, improved post moves/footwork but few counters, etc.
- 15-20: athleticism dipped but still elite, great at-rim, elite passing, solid all-court shooter (from midrange to 3pt), etc., but mostly a terrible and unengaged defensive player (until this season)

I would argue LeBron has never been more of a complete package than *right now*, but of course, he isn't *as* dominant or athletic as he was in his peak (and is still an unreliable to poor FT shooter). Now, don't get me wrong, LeBron is still an unbelievable, 99th percentile athlete, but he's not the 07-12 LeBron anymore.

Back to Kobe. Because Kobe's skills were so refined at such a young age, he achieved the marriage of possessing the complete skills repertoire AND elite athleticism that I believe to be so rare in NBA history. In particular, Kobe's 2003 season was phenomenal from a basketball player standpoint. Forget awards/titles/narratives/etc. for a moment. Watch a full 2002-2003 Kobe Bryant game. This player was at the peak of his powers athletically and an all-court offensive player, able to do anything from elite back-to-the-basket post moves to 3pt shooting to dominant finishes at-rim with either hand and more, and he was a suffocating defensive player. And Kobe possessed this marriage (albeit with mild athletic declines) for a long stretch of time.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ArminNBA
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 20 Sep 2008
Posts: 1459

PostPosted: Thu May 21, 2020 9:07 am    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
EZ-Ryder wrote:
ArminNBA wrote:
If these lists were honest, they wouldn't be presented as a "Rank of the All-Time Greatest Players," but rather as a "Rank of the All-Time Favorite Narratives."

It's quite clear that Jordan, Kobe, and LeBron are the greatest basketball PLAYERS of all time.

In my view, Jordan and Kobe are a tier ahead of LeBron in terms of sustained play as a complete basketball player.

LeBron, in my view, ultimately unlocked nearly every facet of the game, but he has never quite been the complete package all at once - whether it was being a subpar defender early in his career (and abandoning defense again during his Cavs stint) to being a subpar outside shooter until his latter career improvement as an outside shooter to his fairly consistent woes at the stripe. However, LeBron has almost always been utterly dominant and possessed incredible passing and at-rim scoring skills.

Kobe and Jordan possessed the complete package as basketball PLAYERS for a fairly long stretch - at-rim scoring to outside scoring (and everywhere in between), strong team and individual defense, all-time great footwork, excellent passing skills, elite rebounding guards (who could box out a big when needed), brilliant post play, supremely high basketball IQ, et al. And they were also dominant, which is an important compliment to owning the complete skill set.

But these lists aren't really about assessing basketball players in terms of "play," it's about narrative and likability and awards. It's why Duncan and Bird always end up ahead of Kobe on these lists despite not having a strong argument against him (unlike LeBron or KAJ or Magic who have legitimate cases to be made).


To be fair, this isn't a great take. You're clearly writing this with huge favoritism. Lebron isn't complete because he plays bad defense later in his career, but Kobe is complete because of superior footwork? Lebron was an inconsistent free throw shooter, but Kobe has a high basketball IQ? These comparisons for consistency make zero sense.



All the usual suspects on the top 10 list had amazing careers. When I rank them, there's some logic behind it, and some emotional "hell if I know" why I choose one guy above the other.

I'd say that's the case for most people. When people justify their rankings, I virtually never think that the justifications they provide were the reasons they made their choices in the first place. And so the justifications are usually arbitrary, because our rankings are too -- we just don't want to admit it.


Yes, the arbitrary notion of "who was both dominant and had the complete skills repertoire?"

FYI, the concept of an all-court player isn't unique to basketball and it's hilarious that you assign it the label of being arbitrary. Just because you don't know about a particular logic (or it isn't *your* logic behind it) doesn't make it arbitrary and meaningless.

As a huge tennis fan, I also place far more value on all-court tennis players. "Can you play every style?" That's supremely important to me. I value it. It's why I stated multiple times in my post: "in my view."

It's funny how you want to devalue it by portraying me as having arrived at my take unreasonably.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 29357

PostPosted: Thu May 21, 2020 9:20 am    Post subject:

ArminNBA wrote:
activeverb wrote:
EZ-Ryder wrote:
ArminNBA wrote:
If these lists were honest, they wouldn't be presented as a "Rank of the All-Time Greatest Players," but rather as a "Rank of the All-Time Favorite Narratives."

It's quite clear that Jordan, Kobe, and LeBron are the greatest basketball PLAYERS of all time.

In my view, Jordan and Kobe are a tier ahead of LeBron in terms of sustained play as a complete basketball player.

LeBron, in my view, ultimately unlocked nearly every facet of the game, but he has never quite been the complete package all at once - whether it was being a subpar defender early in his career (and abandoning defense again during his Cavs stint) to being a subpar outside shooter until his latter career improvement as an outside shooter to his fairly consistent woes at the stripe. However, LeBron has almost always been utterly dominant and possessed incredible passing and at-rim scoring skills.

Kobe and Jordan possessed the complete package as basketball PLAYERS for a fairly long stretch - at-rim scoring to outside scoring (and everywhere in between), strong team and individual defense, all-time great footwork, excellent passing skills, elite rebounding guards (who could box out a big when needed), brilliant post play, supremely high basketball IQ, et al. And they were also dominant, which is an important compliment to owning the complete skill set.

But these lists aren't really about assessing basketball players in terms of "play," it's about narrative and likability and awards. It's why Duncan and Bird always end up ahead of Kobe on these lists despite not having a strong argument against him (unlike LeBron or KAJ or Magic who have legitimate cases to be made).


To be fair, this isn't a great take. You're clearly writing this with huge favoritism. Lebron isn't complete because he plays bad defense later in his career, but Kobe is complete because of superior footwork? Lebron was an inconsistent free throw shooter, but Kobe has a high basketball IQ? These comparisons for consistency make zero sense.



All the usual suspects on the top 10 list had amazing careers. When I rank them, there's some logic behind it, and some emotional "hell if I know" why I choose one guy above the other.

I'd say that's the case for most people. When people justify their rankings, I virtually never think that the justifications they provide were the reasons they made their choices in the first place. And so the justifications are usually arbitrary, because our rankings are too -- we just don't want to admit it.


Yes, the arbitrary notion of "who was both dominant and had the complete skills repertoire?"

FYI, the concept of an all-court player isn't unique to basketball and it's hilarious that you assign it the label of being arbitrary. Just because you don't know about a particular logic (or it isn't *your* logic behind it) doesn't make it arbitrary and meaningless.

As a huge tennis fan, I also place far more value on all-court tennis players. "Can you play every style?" That's supremely important to me. I value it. It's why I stated multiple times in my post: "in my view."

It's funny how you want to devalue it by portraying me as having arrived at my take unreasonably.



I'm not devaluing your choices. I'm simply saying you're basing your choices on subjective criteria that many others don't think are as important as you do. But everyone does.

It's arbitrary to say that "complete skills" should be a key factor in ranking players.

It's arbitrary to choose what components make up a "complete skillset."

If that's how you justify your choices, cool. Is it compelling to me? Not really. But heck we're talking about guys who have been retired for 5 to 50 years, so I doubt any of us can say anything that will move the needle for anyone else at this point.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ArminNBA
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 20 Sep 2008
Posts: 1459

PostPosted: Thu May 21, 2020 9:37 am    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
ArminNBA wrote:
activeverb wrote:
EZ-Ryder wrote:
ArminNBA wrote:
If these lists were honest, they wouldn't be presented as a "Rank of the All-Time Greatest Players," but rather as a "Rank of the All-Time Favorite Narratives."

It's quite clear that Jordan, Kobe, and LeBron are the greatest basketball PLAYERS of all time.

In my view, Jordan and Kobe are a tier ahead of LeBron in terms of sustained play as a complete basketball player.

LeBron, in my view, ultimately unlocked nearly every facet of the game, but he has never quite been the complete package all at once - whether it was being a subpar defender early in his career (and abandoning defense again during his Cavs stint) to being a subpar outside shooter until his latter career improvement as an outside shooter to his fairly consistent woes at the stripe. However, LeBron has almost always been utterly dominant and possessed incredible passing and at-rim scoring skills.

Kobe and Jordan possessed the complete package as basketball PLAYERS for a fairly long stretch - at-rim scoring to outside scoring (and everywhere in between), strong team and individual defense, all-time great footwork, excellent passing skills, elite rebounding guards (who could box out a big when needed), brilliant post play, supremely high basketball IQ, et al. And they were also dominant, which is an important compliment to owning the complete skill set.

But these lists aren't really about assessing basketball players in terms of "play," it's about narrative and likability and awards. It's why Duncan and Bird always end up ahead of Kobe on these lists despite not having a strong argument against him (unlike LeBron or KAJ or Magic who have legitimate cases to be made).


To be fair, this isn't a great take. You're clearly writing this with huge favoritism. Lebron isn't complete because he plays bad defense later in his career, but Kobe is complete because of superior footwork? Lebron was an inconsistent free throw shooter, but Kobe has a high basketball IQ? These comparisons for consistency make zero sense.



All the usual suspects on the top 10 list had amazing careers. When I rank them, there's some logic behind it, and some emotional "hell if I know" why I choose one guy above the other.

I'd say that's the case for most people. When people justify their rankings, I virtually never think that the justifications they provide were the reasons they made their choices in the first place. And so the justifications are usually arbitrary, because our rankings are too -- we just don't want to admit it.


Yes, the arbitrary notion of "who was both dominant and had the complete skills repertoire?"

FYI, the concept of an all-court player isn't unique to basketball and it's hilarious that you assign it the label of being arbitrary. Just because you don't know about a particular logic (or it isn't *your* logic behind it) doesn't make it arbitrary and meaningless.

As a huge tennis fan, I also place far more value on all-court tennis players. "Can you play every style?" That's supremely important to me. I value it. It's why I stated multiple times in my post: "in my view."

It's funny how you want to devalue it by portraying me as having arrived at my take unreasonably.



I'm not devaluing your choices. I'm simply saying you're basing your choices on subjective criteria that many others don't think are as important as you do. But everyone does.

It's arbitrary to say that "complete skills" should be a key factor in ranking players.

It's arbitrary to choose what components make up a "complete skillset."

Like I said, it's cool if those are big things for you when ranking players. I can't say they are for me, except to the extent that they translate into tangible accomplishments.


Like I said, these rankings are improperly defined. If you want to rank best player accomplishments, then I believe there's a list there (Bill Russell may top that list with 11x titles and 5x MVPs). If you want to rank best player narratives, I believe Michael Jordan tops that list (from the 6/6 Finals records to all the mythology to the final Bulls shot/steal/shot in Utah).

But when assessing a *basketball* player, yes, I'm sorry, basketball *skills* are not arbitrary. It's the most significant element in assessing the quality of a player. And who would be the best at playing a game? Someone who possessed every last skill imaginable in that game. (If you want to get pedantic, we could get into intangible elements of the game like work ethic or even more tangible yet-not-skills elements like durability/longevity, but since we aren't scouting college kids and talking the greatest of the great, multi-time championship players who had long careers, that's not as relevant here). And of course, dominance is an important factor - the ability to impose your skills to such a high degree that you are virtually unstoppable for opponents, whether offensively or defensively.

Again, it's *what* your ranking. You rank based on accomplishments and that's fine. I personally have always felt there should be more clarity on criteria for many of these sports-related rankings/awards (infamously, nobody can figure out "Valuable" in MVP).

That's why I stick to the play of the players when people say "Player Rankings." However, I readily admit Kobe is not the most accomplished player or the most well-liked or the player with the best narrative.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 29357

PostPosted: Thu May 21, 2020 10:54 am    Post subject:

ArminNBA wrote:
I personally have always felt there should be more clarity on criteria for many of these sports-related rankings/awards (infamously, nobody can figure out "Valuable" in MVP).





If you can come up with some clear criteria for MVP or GOAT that people liked, agreed with and used, more power to you.

I think if you awarded MVP based on some clear checklist, it would take out all the fun and people would be no more satisfied with who won the award. They would just end up arguing about the checklist.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 29357

PostPosted: Thu May 21, 2020 11:16 am    Post subject:

ArminNBA wrote:


But when assessing a *basketball* player, yes, I'm sorry, basketball *skills* are not arbitrary. It's the most significant element in assessing the quality of a player. And who would be the best at playing a game? Someone who possessed every last skill imaginable in that game. .



That could be compelling if you came up with a list of 10 specific skills, and then presented some measurement of each of those skills, to show how the 10 guys on the GOAT shortlist stack up against each other. At least then we'd be able to see the underpinnings of your opinion to determine if we agreed with it.

If this is just a fete accompli (the player I like has the best skills and that should be obvious to everyone -- case closed), it would go in one ear and out the other for me.


Last edited by activeverb on Thu May 21, 2020 11:33 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Dreamshake
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 05 May 2006
Posts: 12999

PostPosted: Thu May 21, 2020 11:32 am    Post subject:

moonriver24 wrote:
If you look at Mj, Kobe, Kareem, Magic, Bron, and Bird ... they all had won with talents surrounding them. But you will see who had won with lesser talents among them.

You dont need a complicated analysis to find out who.


I don't see any guy named that won on what wasn't arguably the most talented team in basketball, compared to the other teams they had to play that year. Now if you want to prop someone for winning with less then the list is very small (Dream x1, Duncan x1, Dirk).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ArminNBA
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 20 Sep 2008
Posts: 1459

PostPosted: Thu May 21, 2020 11:42 am    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
ArminNBA wrote:


But when assessing a *basketball* player, yes, I'm sorry, basketball *skills* are not arbitrary. It's the most significant element in assessing the quality of a player. And who would be the best at playing a game? Someone who possessed every last skill imaginable in that game. .


That could compelling if you came up with a list of 10 specific skills, and then presented some measurement of each of those skills, to show how the 10 guys on the GOAT shortlist stack up against each other. At least then we'd be able to see the underpinnings of opinion to see if we agreed with it.

If this is just a fete accompli (the player I like has the best skills - case closed), it would go in one ear and the other for me.


The specific skills go far beyond 10, and I listed many of them, but what's clear when we're talking about the greatest players of all time is that much of what we're describing is easily observable. You're farcically pining for more "data" as a means to deflect from the substance of the argument.

And yes, there's quite a lot of data - much of it readily accessible - that proves Kobe's strong all-court efficiency as a shooter (Goldsberry's Spread% and Range% is a personal favorite) or Kobe's brilliance as a post player (Synergy data shows his elite PPP in this category) or Kobe's strength as a rebounder (always a league leader or amongst the league leaders for guards).

But also...you've watched Kobe play basketball? It's quite clear that Kobe possesses nearly every discernible skill for a basketball player. Sure, look at Synergy for his elite PPP in the post, but if you watched him play, you'd not only observe his effectiveness, but enjoy the beauty of the footwork, ambidextrousness, pumps, fakes, and endless counters.

It's simply common sense stuff. You don't need a PhD.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 29357

PostPosted: Thu May 21, 2020 11:44 am    Post subject:

Dreamshake wrote:
moonriver24 wrote:
If you look at Mj, Kobe, Kareem, Magic, Bron, and Bird ... they all had won with talents surrounding them. But you will see who had won with lesser talents among them.

You dont need a complicated analysis to find out who.


I don't see any guy named that won on what wasn't arguably the most talented team in basketball, compared to the other teams they had to play that year. Now if you want to prop someone for winning with less then the list is very small (Dream x1, Duncan x1, Dirk).



All ring teams are talented and/or have players who fit together well. I've never seen anyone make a compelling case of how to evaluate the relative talent a star had around him or played against.

Some people have tried to do this based on the individual players career win shares, or all-star appearances, or simply using their own subjective assessment of the players.

There's never been a single time I felt the person was really hitting the mark. There's always a tremendous amount of noise in these assessments.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
BadGuy
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 13 May 2008
Posts: 2352

PostPosted: Thu May 21, 2020 12:21 pm    Post subject:

Duncan, Russell, and Bird over Kobe is a joke!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
SuperboyReformed
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 07 Oct 2012
Posts: 4009

PostPosted: Thu May 21, 2020 12:49 pm    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
ArminNBA wrote:
activeverb wrote:
ArminNBA wrote:


But when assessing a *basketball* player, yes, I'm sorry, basketball *skills* are not arbitrary. It's the most significant element in assessing the quality of a player. And who would be the best at playing a game? Someone who possessed every last skill imaginable in that game. .


That could compelling if you came up with a list of 10 specific skills, and then presented some measurement of each of those skills, to show how the 10 guys on the GOAT shortlist stack up against each other. At least then we'd be able to see the underpinnings of opinion to see if we agreed with it.

If this is just a fete accompli (the player I like has the best skills - case closed), it would go in one ear and the other for me.


The specific skills go far beyond 10, and I listed many of them, but what's clear when we're talking about the greatest players of all time is that much of what we're describing is easily observable. You're farcically pining for more "data" as a means to deflect from the substance of the argument.

And yes, there's quite a lot of data - much of it readily accessible - that proves Kobe's strong all-court efficiency as a shooter (Goldsberry's Spread% and Range% is a personal favorite) or Kobe's brilliance as a post player (Synergy data shows his elite PPP in this category) or Kobe's strength as a rebounder (always a league leader or amongst the league leaders for guards).

But also...you've watched Kobe play basketball? It's quite clear that Kobe possesses nearly every discernible skill for a basketball player. Sure, look at Synergy for his elite PPP in the post, but if you watched him play, you'd not only observe his effectiveness, but enjoy the beauty of the footwork, ambidextrousness, pumps, fakes, and endless counters.

It's simply common sense stuff. You don't need a PhD.



Most of the guys on the GOAT short list were great all-around players. The ones who had some kink in their armor were so strong in other areas the kink may not really matter that much.

If there is a compelling way to contrast and compare the skills of the all-time greats I don't know what it is. But it can't just be "It's obvious," "Watch them play," or "Look at [these two pieces of data] from Synergy."

If you don't have an actual methodology, it's just an eye-of-the-beholder thing.

Anyway, I don't see this is really going anywhere but in circles. You believe what you believe, and you believe it strongly. That's cool.

shooting/scoring>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>anything else

skills related to scoring in these debates should be ranked far higher than anything else.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 29357

PostPosted: Thu May 21, 2020 1:13 pm    Post subject:

SuperboyReformed wrote:

shooting/scoring>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>anything else

skills related to scoring in these debates should be ranked far higher than anything else.



I'm a little more loosey-goosey about this. I don't have any methodology where I give a specific weight to scoring or any other factor. When I rank players, I take everything into consideration, but I'm also shooting from the hip a little. My rankings can change a little bit on any given day depending on my mood.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
vanexelent
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 May 2005
Posts: 30081

PostPosted: Thu May 21, 2020 9:00 pm    Post subject:

venturalakersfan wrote:
I would still have Kobe over Duncan, and TD is my favorite player the past 20 years. Something like this, subject to change daily.

Kareem
Jordan
Magic
Russell
Kobe
Duncan
Lebron
Hakeem
West
Shaq


Why did you exclude Wilt, in favor of Hakeem or West? Generally I dont see those 2 in the top 10.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ArminNBA
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 20 Sep 2008
Posts: 1459

PostPosted: Thu May 21, 2020 10:25 pm    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
ArminNBA wrote:
activeverb wrote:
ArminNBA wrote:


But when assessing a *basketball* player, yes, I'm sorry, basketball *skills* are not arbitrary. It's the most significant element in assessing the quality of a player. And who would be the best at playing a game? Someone who possessed every last skill imaginable in that game. .


That could compelling if you came up with a list of 10 specific skills, and then presented some measurement of each of those skills, to show how the 10 guys on the GOAT shortlist stack up against each other. At least then we'd be able to see the underpinnings of opinion to see if we agreed with it.

If this is just a fete accompli (the player I like has the best skills - case closed), it would go in one ear and the other for me.


The specific skills go far beyond 10, and I listed many of them, but what's clear when we're talking about the greatest players of all time is that much of what we're describing is easily observable. You're farcically pining for more "data" as a means to deflect from the substance of the argument.

And yes, there's quite a lot of data - much of it readily accessible - that proves Kobe's strong all-court efficiency as a shooter (Goldsberry's Spread% and Range% is a personal favorite) or Kobe's brilliance as a post player (Synergy data shows his elite PPP in this category) or Kobe's strength as a rebounder (always a league leader or amongst the league leaders for guards).

But also...you've watched Kobe play basketball? It's quite clear that Kobe possesses nearly every discernible skill for a basketball player. Sure, look at Synergy for his elite PPP in the post, but if you watched him play, you'd not only observe his effectiveness, but enjoy the beauty of the footwork, ambidextrousness, pumps, fakes, and endless counters.

It's simply common sense stuff. You don't need a PhD.



Most of the guys on the GOAT short list were great all-around players. The ones who had some kink in their armor were so strong in other areas the kink may not really matter that much.

If there is a compelling way to contrast and compare the skills of the all-time greats I don't know what it is. But it can't just be "It's obvious," "Watch them play," or "Look at [these two pieces of data] from Synergy."

If you don't have an actual methodology, it's just an eye-of-the-beholder thing.

Anyway, I don't see this is really going anywhere but in circles. You believe what you believe, and you believe it strongly. That's cool.


This is such an impressive unintended display of performative contempt for the basics of understanding the game. You've actually scandalized the concept of observing skills.

Look man, it's fine to disagree on whether all-around game matters in your GOAT estimation, but it's laughable to suggest there isn't a compelling way to contrast and compare skills of all-time greats. But you're not interested in countering the substance of my posts, so instead you're trying to smear fairly foundational concepts as illogical or unsubstantial.

It's also hilarious how you desperately needed "measurements" or data to prove skills exist, implying my posts were meritless, and I bring a couple examples to the table, but now "it's only two pieces of data," which completely misses the point I was making, with brevity, that data exists for fans/analysts/scouts/coaches/etc. to corroborate the impression that these skills exist (you said, how can we measure these skill sets...well, sorry, but you can lol)...

However, I'm seeing that it'll never be enough. You're so pot committed that easily observable facts like Kobe Bryant's all-around game are, in your estimation, simply an impossible determination to make and, anyhow, not compelling.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 29357

PostPosted: Fri May 22, 2020 7:00 am    Post subject:

ArminNBA wrote:
activeverb wrote:
ArminNBA wrote:
activeverb wrote:
ArminNBA wrote:


But when assessing a *basketball* player, yes, I'm sorry, basketball *skills* are not arbitrary. It's the most significant element in assessing the quality of a player. And who would be the best at playing a game? Someone who possessed every last skill imaginable in that game. .


That could compelling if you came up with a list of 10 specific skills, and then presented some measurement of each of those skills, to show how the 10 guys on the GOAT shortlist stack up against each other. At least then we'd be able to see the underpinnings of opinion to see if we agreed with it.

If this is just a fete accompli (the player I like has the best skills - case closed), it would go in one ear and the other for me.


The specific skills go far beyond 10, and I listed many of them, but what's clear when we're talking about the greatest players of all time is that much of what we're describing is easily observable. You're farcically pining for more "data" as a means to deflect from the substance of the argument.

And yes, there's quite a lot of data - much of it readily accessible - that proves Kobe's strong all-court efficiency as a shooter (Goldsberry's Spread% and Range% is a personal favorite) or Kobe's brilliance as a post player (Synergy data shows his elite PPP in this category) or Kobe's strength as a rebounder (always a league leader or amongst the league leaders for guards).

But also...you've watched Kobe play basketball? It's quite clear that Kobe possesses nearly every discernible skill for a basketball player. Sure, look at Synergy for his elite PPP in the post, but if you watched him play, you'd not only observe his effectiveness, but enjoy the beauty of the footwork, ambidextrousness, pumps, fakes, and endless counters.

It's simply common sense stuff. You don't need a PhD.



Most of the guys on the GOAT short list were great all-around players. The ones who had some kink in their armor were so strong in other areas the kink may not really matter that much.

If there is a compelling way to contrast and compare the skills of the all-time greats I don't know what it is. But it can't just be "It's obvious," "Watch them play," or "Look at [these two pieces of data] from Synergy."

If you don't have an actual methodology, it's just an eye-of-the-beholder thing.

Anyway, I don't see this is really going anywhere but in circles. You believe what you believe, and you believe it strongly. That's cool.


This is such an impressive unintended display of performative contempt for the basics of understanding the game. You've actually scandalized the concept of observing skills.

Look man, it's fine to disagree on whether all-around game matters in your GOAT estimation, but it's laughable to suggest there isn't a compelling way to contrast and compare skills of all-time greats. But you're not interested in countering the substance of my posts, so instead you're trying to smear fairly foundational concepts as illogical or unsubstantial.

It's also hilarious how you desperately needed "measurements" or data to prove skills exist, implying my posts were meritless, and I bring a couple examples to the table, but now "it's only two pieces of data," which completely misses the point I was making, with brevity, that data exists for fans/analysts/scouts/coaches/etc. to corroborate the impression that these skills exist (you said, how can we measure these skill sets...well, sorry, but you can lol)...

However, I'm seeing that it'll never be enough. You're so pot committed that easily observable facts like Kobe Bryant's all-around game are, in your estimation, simply an impossible determination to make and, anyhow, not compelling.



C'mon, dude. No reason to get hostile over something as meaningless as ranking NBA players. This is about as trivial and unimportant a pastime as I can imagine.

Can I tell that Kobe, Kareem, Hakeem, Steve Nash and MJ have great skills? Sure. Do I have a way to rank who has better skills (1, 2, 3, 4, 5) among those guys without just pulling it out of my behind? Not really. If you can, more power to you.

Like I said, when I rank players, I do it mostly by what they've accomplished. I don't try to figure out what percentage of those accomplishments are due to basketball skills, how much to athleticism, how much to determination or other X factors.

Your approach might vary, and that's cool. To each his own. Have a good Memorial Day weekend!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 3 of 5
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2018 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB