Basketball Megathread (Current Topic: 2023-24 Season) - Lounge

AfterHours

Gender: Male
Location: originally from scaruffi.com ;-)

Mercury wrote:

quickly put together, obviously inexpert, slapped together Top 50 25 on a whim ....

My All Time top 25 NBA player ranks:

(Players in bold are BOTH 1. still playing and 2. could conceivably move up my rankings or are probably going to - Lebron I can't see passing Jordan... but whatever not in the mood for that old debate now.)

(Players with an asterisk next to them are there DESPITE me having no clear understanding of their legend, having never watched them and never really read up on them enough to FEEL like I comprehend their greatness.)

1. Michael Jordan
2. Lebron James
3. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar

top 3 in that order are set and were easy to type out with no thought... now it gets tough...

4. Magic Johnson
5. Bill Russell
6. Larry Bird
7. Wilt Chamberlain
8. Tim Duncan
9. Hakeem Olajuwon
10. Shaquille O'Neal
11. Steph Curry
12. Kobe Bryant
13. Kevin Durant

at this point and after this tier it became more muddled and dartboard-y for me.

14. Jerry West
15. Oscar Robertson*
16. Moses Malone
17. Kevin Garnett
18. Karl Malone
19. Nikola Jokic
20. Giannis Antetokounmpo (I'd be lying if I said I wasn't tempted to put both Jokic and Giannis above that moses, KG, Karl Malone trio... but a cooler head prevailed. On Track both of them to be top 15 maybe top 10.)
21. David Robinson*
22. Julius Erving*
23. Dirk Nowitzki
24. Elgin Baylor*
25. Isiah Thomas

Notable Names I omitted despite really wanting to be a fanboy for (Pettit, as a stlouis boy), or despite KNOWING I'd get hate (Barkley) are as follows: Charles Barkley, Bob Pettit, George Mikan, Dwayne Wade, John Stockton, John Havlicek, and Chris Paul.

Nice - great list Merc!

Would be fun to do a poll of best basketball players of all time just like we've done for movies, or genres of movies, etc. Could be interesting to see what we all come up with as a top ten list and so on down from there. We could each submit up to 50 selections (or maybe 25 would be preferred?). I would be up for it if others are too. It could be done on a separate thread though.
_________________
Best Classical
Best Films
Best Paintings

LedZep

Mercury wrote:

quickly put together, obviously inexpert, slapped together Top 50 25 on a whim ....

My All Time top 25 NBA player ranks:

(Players in bold are BOTH 1. still playing and 2. could conceivably move up my rankings or are probably going to - Lebron I can't see passing Jordan... but whatever not in the mood for that old debate now.)

(Players with an asterisk next to them are there DESPITE me having no clear understanding of their legend, having never watched them and never really read up on them enough to FEEL like I comprehend their greatness.)

1. Michael Jordan
2. Lebron James
3. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar

top 3 in that order are set and were easy to type out with no thought... now it gets tough...

4. Magic Johnson
5. Bill Russell
6. Larry Bird
7. Wilt Chamberlain
8. Tim Duncan
9. Hakeem Olajuwon
10. Shaquille O'Neal
11. Steph Curry
12. Kobe Bryant
13. Kevin Durant

at this point and after this tier it became more muddled and dartboard-y for me.

14. Jerry West
15. Oscar Robertson*
16. Moses Malone
17. Kevin Garnett
18. Karl Malone
19. Nikola Jokic
20. Giannis Antetokounmpo (I'd be lying if I said I wasn't tempted to put both Jokic and Giannis above that moses, KG, Karl Malone trio... but a cooler head prevailed. On Track both of them to be top 15 maybe top 10.)
21. David Robinson*
22. Julius Erving*
23. Dirk Nowitzki
24. Elgin Baylor*
25. Isiah Thomas

Notable Names I omitted despite really wanting to be a fanboy for (Pettit, as a stlouis boy), or despite KNOWING I'd get hate (Barkley) are as follows: Charles Barkley, Bob Pettit, George Mikan, Dwayne Wade, John Stockton, John Havlicek, and Chris Paul.

That's a very solid list, a lot of rankings I agree with. In fact, there's nothing here I disagree with lol. I'll try to make my top 25.
_________________
Finally updated the overall chart

2020s
90s

AfterHours

Gender: Male
Location: originally from scaruffi.com ;-)

Should we do a poll? What do you all think?
_________________
Best Classical
Best Films
Best Paintings

Mercury
Turn your back on the pay-you-back last call

Gender: Male
Location: St. Louis

AfterHours wrote:

Should we do a poll? What do you all think?

I mean that could be cool. My main qualm or concern is that sports, unlike art, is more (note: MORE, not an absolute) objective. I think unlike someone in a movie list project putting, idk, Freddie Got Fingered at #1, putting Tristan Thompson Number 1 would just be objectively absurd and there is no way to defend such a position. Of course would that happen? Not likely. But I could see someone LOVING and being a fanboy of, say, the Mavericks and placing Nowitzki number 1 and Luka number 4 all time. lol.

What am I really saying? well, idk, I feel like it could get weird. And outside of solid trolling/good natured bullying potential, I don't see it being super interesting. BUT I suppose me putting my top 25 randomly here was an invitation for others to rib me and make their own lists and compare. So... basically your idea. Idk what I am even getting at. Would love to see some other top 10, 20, 25, 50 lists.

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

In making that list I changed it from 50 to 25 because at about 27 onwards I noticed I was just looking at stats or other lists and saying "uhhh... yeah I am aware that Walt Frazier was great but what do I actually KNOW or THINK about this 1970s great? Not much" and I started listing players that I don't have a feel for at all.
_________________
-Ryan

ONLY 4% of people can understand this chart! Come try!

My Fave Metal - you won't believe #5!!!

AfterHours

Gender: Male
Location: originally from scaruffi.com ;-)

Mercury wrote:

I mean that could be cool. My main qualm or concern is that sports, unlike art, is more (note: MORE, not an absolute) objective. I think unlike someone in a movie list project putting, idk, Freddie Got Fingered at #1, putting Tristan Thompson Number 1 would just be objectively absurd and there is no way to defend such a position. Of course would that happen? Not likely. But I could see someone LOVING and being a fanboy of, say, the Mavericks and placing Nowitzki number 1 and Luka number 4 all time. lol.

What am I really saying? well, idk, I feel like it could get weird. And outside of solid trolling/good natured bullying potential, I don't see it being super interesting. BUT I suppose me putting my top 25 randomly here was an invitation for others to rib me and make their own lists and compare. So... basically your idea. Idk what I am even getting at. Would love to see some other top 10, 20, 25, 50 lists.

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

In making that list I changed it from 50 to 25 because at about 27 onwards I noticed I was just looking at stats or other lists and saying "uhhh... yeah I am aware that Walt Frazier was great but what do I actually KNOW or THINK about this 1970s great? Not much" and I started listing players that I don't have a feel for at all.

Thanks for your input. I do think it could yield interesting results/arguments in "groups", such as the order of 1-3, such as the continual argument between Russell and Wilt placing higher (Wilt is clearly the superior individual talent and more dominant individual force, but Russell mastered playing within a team and focusing on what he needed to do for that particular team to help them win while one could argue that Wilt, despite his dominance, didn't help his "team" as much as it seems because in the first half of his career there is a case that he stifled the other players by consuming too many shots and not passing enough, unlike Russell). Or the very close call between Kobe, Hakeem, Duncan, Shaq? Bird or Magic? (Yes, Magic won 5 while Bird won 3 but didn't Magic have the superior cast most of the time? Was HE really better? Possibly, but it's worth looking more closely at than being a given ... Ultimately, Magic had a little bit longer "prime" -- after injuries to Bird -- and was actually still in it when he retired due to HIV, so I might give him the edge but I would probably say Bird had the higher "peak"). Giannis or Jokic and how high should they really be already? (I'm not sure I'm ready to place them over David Robinson YET, even if I think their trajectory should sooner or later surpass him assuming they continue at this rate of success. Barkley or Malone? West or Oscar? All of these little arguments are very close in my opinion and can be interesting debates.

There is also a more fundamental debate that can be interesting. An uber efficient closer to the basket type player (like say Shaq, or even in some ways, Lebron) versus a player like Kobe who may not have the same efficiency statistically but is nevertheless much more of a threat from all over the floor outside of 1-3 feet from the basket (than especially, Shaq, and in iso situations, Lebron, but that's not taking full consideration of Lebron's passing threat...). Plus (over Shaq) Kobe can control the flow and pace of the game because he has the ball in his hands so much more, often starting with it, passing it around and often ending with it, with the play being centered around his decision making (whereas Shaq doesn't get it until just before he shoots, or maybe passes back out of a double team). These points don't necessarily show up in the numbers so well, and make for a more "subjective" interpretation than just comparing basic stats or effective FG percentages, or PER (etc). Kobe's off ball "offense" was also very high end, continually bending the defense with his tireless positioning, physicality (battling around players, for positioning) and relentlessly hunting his spots. This is "offensive attack" without necessarily scoring, that doesn't really show up in his ppg or, really, anything. But was obviously a major factor in his team's excellent offensive performance during his prime. And another point: how those who played with him didn't really lose anything by doing so (for the most part they were able to fully be themselves, ie, Shaq, Gasol, Odom; whereas maybe something is lost in certain players teaming up with Lebron, ie, Bosh, Love because they HAVE to shorten their games and repertoire to allow him to be the sole "heliocentric" centerpiece and Lebron hasn't really ever been a great off-ball offensive player (to open up the floor for his teammates by off-ball movement; he obviously does through his passing from being the central point of attack, but not nearly as much off-ball). These are some points that don't show up in stats but may have some merit in explaining how Kobe won 5 championships and Lebron has won 4 despite Lebron having (on avg) more help throughout his career (and by pointing that out, I'm not saying I would place Kobe higher than Lebron all time, it's just the sort of thing that could be considered beyond more objective or obvious measures).

That said, you're the only one to respond so it probably wouldn't get enough traction, though maybe if it were posted individually as its own thread it could get more notice. One way or the other, I may post mine sooner or later, or start a new thread on the topic (even if not a poll; just to post my own and get others selections, to discuss and compare and debate, etc).
_________________
Best Classical
Best Films
Best Paintings

LedZep

1. Michael Jordan
2. Lebron James
3. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
4. Tim Duncan
5. Bill Russell
6. Magic Johnson
7. Larry Bird
8. Steph Curry
9. Wilt Chamberlain
10. Shaquille O'Neal
11. Hakeem Olajuwon
12. Kobe Bryant
13. Kevin Durant
14. Jerry West
15. Karl Malone
16. Moses Malone
17. Kevin Garnett
18. Dirk Nowitzki
19.Nikola Jokic
20. Giannis Antetokounmpo
21. Julius Erving
22. Elgin Baylor
23. Charles Barkley
24. David Robinson
25. John Havlicek

This is not perfect, but ranking players rarely is. Despite what some people might tell you, there are no "objective" stats, it's all about our interpretation and evaluation, although (advanced) stats really do help a lot. The most important thing to me is how much a player impacts his team - both winning and just being good in general. So that might explain why I think Tim Duncan is a top 5 player of all time, why Russell is ahead of Wilt, why Steph is ranked in the top 10 and why I rank current superstars like Giannis and Jokic high. I know that sounds really abstract, but I'm trying to combine the eye test, stats, replays and analysis all in one. Not a single one of these methods is perfect, but combined they do sort of make sense. Eye test - you cannot watch every single game ever. Advanced stats - biased, need to be carefully interpreted and most of the time straight up suck for defensive metrics (I care about defense a lot, as is obvious from the list). Replays and analysis - again, you cannot break down every play a player has ever made and evaluate that.

Some thoughts on the top 10/11:
- the top 3 is set in stone, unless Lebron James continues playing at this level for several more years. In that case he'd be by far the best ever at sheer volume, so you could make the case for number one over Jordan's shorter, but ultimately more dominant career.
- Tim Duncan, Russell and Magic could all be number 4. Ultimately, Tim is ranked 4th because he's quietly one of the most dominant players we've ever seen. His 2003 playoff run ranks first in win shares - at his peak, he was possibly the best defender ever while being among the best offensive weapons of the decade. His durability and sheer quantity of seasons at the top is unmatched except for Lebron and KAJ (who are both top 3), he could adapt to many different schemes Pop decided to try and was one of the smartest players I've ever seen. When you look at his career overall, only Russell could challenge him for the title of the best defender ever imo.
- Russell is 5th because of 2 main things: it's difficult to truly evaluate him as an all time great considering the competition and rules of his era, and I just haven't had the chance or resources to watch enough of his videos. None of these 2 are completely valid reasons to rank him below Duncan, yet I just did it. Like I said, this is not and cannot be an objective list.
- Magic slots in at 6 because both Duncan and Russell were 2 way monsters, and Magic's defense wasn't that spectacular, so his overall value is a bit lower. Despite that, he's one of the 3 best offensive players of all time (Jordan and Curry), and I'm honestly leaning towards him being the best. A true magician.
- Bird could be the best all around player of all time. He could fit into any system ever with his off ball playing, great individual and team defense and no special need to be a ball hog. Simply put, he was that good.
- Curry is an interesting case since I could see easily him at number 6 when all is said and done. Both Magic and Bird had their careers cut short, and if Curry last longer, I think there's a solid case for him being better than Magic. Pretty much just as good at his peak, plus having a (potentially) longer career. All 3 of them are supported by both stats and eye test.
- Wilt is the toughest one to rank in the 3-11 range. He was not as effective as the other guys, but he was also the most talented and purely dominant on all levels. The usual discussion, I personally don't see him as a top 5 or 6 guy, but my system admittedly isn't perfect.
- Hakeem and Shaq are interchangeable, but I usually rank Shaq higher because of his incredible peak dominance over multiple deep playoff runs and regular seasons. Hakeem is a better all around player because of his defense, and I'd say his 95 run is the best among these two, but the shorter peak and offensive ceiling make me rank him outside of top 10, which is a travesty, but someone has to be outside.
_________________
Finally updated the overall chart

2020s
90s

AfterHours

Gender: Male
Location: originally from scaruffi.com ;-)

LedZep wrote:

1. Michael Jordan
2. Lebron James
3. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
4. Tim Duncan
5. Bill Russell
6. Magic Johnson
7. Larry Bird
8. Steph Curry
9. Wilt Chamberlain
10. Shaquille O'Neal
11. Hakeem Olajuwon
12. Kobe Bryant
13. Kevin Durant
14. Jerry West
15. Karl Malone
16. Moses Malone
17. Kevin Garnett
18. Dirk Nowitzki
19.Nikola Jokic
20. Giannis Antetokounmpo
21. Julius Erving
22. Elgin Baylor
23. Charles Barkley
24. David Robinson
25. John Havlicek

This is not perfect, but ranking players rarely is. Despite what some people might tell you, there are no "objective" stats, it's all about our interpretation and evaluation, although (advanced) stats really do help a lot. The most important thing to me is how much a player impacts his team - both winning and just being good in general. So that might explain why I think Tim Duncan is a top 5 player of all time, why Russell is ahead of Wilt, why Steph is ranked in the top 10 and why I rank current superstars like Giannis and Jokic high. I know that sounds really abstract, but I'm trying to combine the eye test, stats, replays and analysis all in one. Not a single one of these methods is perfect, but combined they do sort of make sense. Eye test - you cannot watch every single game ever. Advanced stats - biased, need to be carefully interpreted and most of the time straight up suck for defensive metrics (I care about defense a lot, as is obvious from the list). Replays and analysis - again, you cannot break down every play a player has ever made and evaluate that.

Some thoughts on the top 10/11:
- the top 3 is set in stone, unless Lebron James continues playing at this level for several more years. In that case he'd be by far the best ever at sheer volume, so you could make the case for number one over Jordan's shorter, but ultimately more dominant career.
- Tim Duncan, Russell and Magic could all be number 4. Ultimately, Tim is ranked 4th because he's quietly one of the most dominant players we've ever seen. His 2003 playoff run ranks first in win shares - at his peak, he was possibly the best defender ever while being among the best offensive weapons of the decade. His durability and sheer quantity of seasons at the top is unmatched except for Lebron and KAJ (who are both top 3), he could adapt to many different schemes Pop decided to try and was one of the smartest players I've ever seen. When you look at his career overall, only Russell could challenge him for the title of the best defender ever imo.
- Russell is 5th because of 2 main things: it's difficult to truly evaluate him as an all time great considering the competition and rules of his era, and I just haven't had the chance or resources to watch enough of his videos. None of these 2 are completely valid reasons to rank him below Duncan, yet I just did it. Like I said, this is not and cannot be an objective list.
- Magic slots in at 6 because both Duncan and Russell were 2 way monsters, and Magic's defense wasn't that spectacular, so his overall value is a bit lower. Despite that, he's one of the 3 best offensive players of all time (Jordan and Curry), and I'm honestly leaning towards him being the best. A true magician.
- Bird could be the best all around player of all time. He could fit into any system ever with his off ball playing, great individual and team defense and no special need to be a ball hog. Simply put, he was that good.
- Curry is an interesting case since I could see easily him at number 6 when all is said and done. Both Magic and Bird had their careers cut short, and if Curry last longer, I think there's a solid case for him being better than Magic. Pretty much just as good at his peak, plus having a (potentially) longer career. All 3 of them are supported by both stats and eye test.
- Wilt is the toughest one to rank in the 3-11 range. He was not as effective as the other guys, but he was also the most talented and purely dominant on all levels. The usual discussion, I personally don't see him as a top 5 or 6 guy, but my system admittedly isn't perfect.
- Hakeem and Shaq are interchangeable, but I usually rank Shaq higher because of his incredible peak dominance over multiple deep playoff runs and regular seasons. Hakeem is a better all around player because of his defense, and I'd say his 95 run is the best among these two, but the shorter peak and offensive ceiling make me rank him outside of top 10, which is a travesty, but someone has to be outside.

Love the selections and explanations Led Zep!

Did you forget Oscar though?

Note re: Oscar ... completely besides his absurd stats, before Jordan he is perhaps the most fundamentally sound player ever. People sometimes mistake his methodical game and ball handling as being "slow" or even think his ball handling was weak -- and maybe he would've never handled like Kyrie Irving -- but it is harder than you think to move all around the court around and through defenses without the slightest carry or mis-step in ball handling and keeping that handle so uniform and perfect and so it seems much more true that he was meticulously playing in an uber controlled, "mistake free" manner without trying to display "extraneous" movement or flashiness, and meticulously caring for the ball so as never to carry or travel, the rules of which were much stricter in his time (as you probably know, virtually all of today's wing or high usage ball-handling players would be called for numerous travels/carries per game if they made the same moves in the 60s).
_________________
Best Classical
Best Films
Best Paintings

LedZep

AfterHours wrote:

Did you forget Oscar though?

Yes I did. He'd be 24 probably, the main criticism of him is that he's like Westbrook, a player with insane stats and not much else. While I do think that's true to a certain extent (stat padding is certainly a thing), it's also waaay too overblown. Both Westbrook and Oscar lead some of the most mediocre teams of all time to playoffs, and when they did have crazy triple double games, their teams usually won.

Agree about the dribbling and being technically exceptional, I think Jerry West and him were the true geniuses of their era in terms of ball handling under strict rules.
_________________
Finally updated the overall chart

2020s
90s

mickilennial
The Most Trusted Name in News

Gender: Female
Age: 35
Location: Detroit

I think I'd put Kareem over Bron, but I haven't really had time to think about an all time ranking. I don't even know my own metrics -- how weighted does winning impact things? What are other intangible elements? etc.

AfterHours

Gender: Male
Location: originally from scaruffi.com ;-)

LedZep wrote:

Yes I did. He'd be 24 probably, the main criticism of him is that he's like Westbrook, a player with insane stats and not much else. While I do think that's true to a certain extent (stat padding is certainly a thing), it's also waaay too overblown. Both Westbrook and Oscar lead some of the most mediocre teams of all time to playoffs, and when they did have crazy triple double games, their teams usually won.

Agree about the dribbling and being technically exceptional, I think Jerry West and him were the true geniuses of their era in terms of ball handling under strict rules.

Thanks Led Zep, makes sense. I think Oscar was a lot more calculated (more of a true point guard, combined with a shooting guard/small forward) than Westbrook, whose effort I love but he is a bit too impulsive for his own good at times. And for Oscar this led to far less mistakes/turnovers. But I understand the comparison and I assume you don't think their pace and style is all that similar -- just maybe some of their stats being (arguably) somewhat empty.

I think the two toughest to rank are Wilt and Kobe. On one hand there is a strong argument that Kobe is the most skilled overall player of all time (maybe even including Jordan) and his peak games may be the best player ever seen (or perhaps second to Jordan). But on the other, he also had a tendency to take this too far and keep shooting beyond getting his teammates more involved, playing "one on one" even when unnecessary, and sometimes this cost his team by wanting too much to take things into his own hands (most notably in the Finals vs Detroit when he ruined that series for the Lakers, presumably due to his conflict with Shaq who he wasn't getting the ball enough despite Shaq being clearly the best player for that series and the matchup they needed to exploit more for them to win). So he is very hard to rank, because on one hand there is this eye test when he is "ON" as: "this may be the best basketball player that has ever played in the history of the world" ... And on the other, when the shot wasn't falling, he could be a net negative for his team.

Wilt is tough too because here we have the most dominant individual player ever who would clearly destroy Russell one on one (and perhaps any player ever in his prime). BUT unlike Russell (who from day one was among the greatest team players ever), Wilt didn't really figure out how to make his team better (beyond just taking a ton of shots for himself which was good enough to make his team one of the better teams in the league and led them to the playoffs but also limited them below championship caliber because it had predictable offensive limitations and didn't get his teammates involved enough) ...until 66-67 and that was only after he started playing a lot more like Russell (strongest emphasis on defensive side of the floor, getting teammates involved instead of chasing herculean offensive stats for himself), and it was only after that when he won his two championships (including finally going through Russell's Celtics on the way to one of them) and made 5 of his 6 Finals. While here Russell was doing that his entire career (plus winning all his trips to the Finals). So its kind of weird: its obvious that Wilt was the better individual player, especially offensively he was a far superior individual "one on one" player than Russell, while Russell was probably the best overall defensive player in NBA history (imo, because he wasn't just great in the post defensively, like Duncan for instance, but his coverage extended out into mid-range too or wherever the ball was, more like Hakeem or Garnett but quicker) but Wilt also wasn't far behind Russell defensively (so offense plus defense he is clearly the superior overall "individual" player, not just above Russell but maybe anyone). The biggest knock against him from an individual talent or player perspective would be his FT shooting weakness that could be exploited, especially at the end of games (like Shaq) But anyway ... so he is the better individual player but not team player, with insane unbreakable stats, among the highest advanced stats too (all higher than Russell's besides defense) making him confusing to rank because to a degree he accumulated these numbers at the expense of his team, and only found his highest success when he scaled that back some. But also on the other hand (taking a more positive view of a "negative") his career is kind of fascinating because in its first half he was perhaps the best, most dominant individual player ever and in the second half played more like Russell with a little bit less Finals success (than Russell) but still very impressive. So he did BOTH, proved he could be either one.
_________________
Best Classical
Best Films
Best Paintings

Last edited by AfterHours on 07/09/2023 00:30; edited 1 time in total