The Four Permanent Members of G.O.A.T. Discussion

[Pushxx]

My top 10 list:
1. MJ
2. Kareem
3. Russell
4. Magic
5. Bird
6. Wilt*
7. Shaq
8. Duncan
9. Kobe
10. Hakeem**

*I've struggle with where to put Wilt. He should either be #4 or #6. I've settled on #6, as much as it kills me.

**It kills me more to put Hakeem at #10. He had to go against some impossible competition in the 80s. But I gotta do it.

Oh and I've changed my list many times over the years. It's just impossible to give a specific ranking because of the hundreds of factors involved.

[CavaliersFTW]

It seems that the best to deal with these debates is to consider the players overall impact to the game. There is not one aspect to consider for the players legacy. Rather, there are dozens of components, such as ability to win, success, skill, control of the game, etc., that contribute. Ideally everybody would have watched and experienced all these players play, instead of conjecturing. (This basketball debate of GOAT is most similar to the boxing GOAT debate, because in both cases it seems that the only true way to judge is to have experienced the athletes first hand).

So it is not easy to make a clearly defined GOAT list. But one thing seems to be of general consensus. There are six players who have impacted and contributed significantly more to the game than any other players. Those players being Jordan, Kareem, Wilt, Russell, Magic, and Bird, with MJ even standing out from those individuals. So to me there are SIX permanent members of the GOAT list, with MJ being the greatest.

[PHILA]

Only permanent member : Jordan.

Kareem has better case than Russell.

You may just be a fan of Jordan's manufactured legacy, instead of his real one. No true fan of Jordan knowing the qualities that made him the player he was would be so demeaning towards Russell. Might this be an overemphasis on ppg & shooting percentage? There's no doubt Kareem with his touch was a much better shooter than Russell from all over the court. Aside from that, there is absolutely nothing he does as good or better than Bill (as far as physical skills). Some may say footwork in reference to KAJ's offensive maneuverability in the pivot (of course neglecting the defensive footwork of Bill), however as poor as Russell's shooting touch was he had outstanding footwork. Below we can see him perform the "wheeling" hook shot move that KAJ made a living off of.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8UtG7-I2wBw#t=23m5s

Of course in comparing intangibles it is an even bigger gap in Russell's favor.

[ThaRegul8r]

You may just be a fan of Jordan's manufactured legacy, instead of his real one. No true fan of Jordan knowing the qualities that made him the player he was would be so demeaning towards Russell.

Evidently, you're not familiar with the modern basketball fan, who I've observed for decades.

For the modern basketball fan, being a fan (short for fanatic) means demeaning any player who presents a potential perceived threat to the status of your favorite player. A "true fan" of a player unceasingly works to destroy all competition so that in the minds of "most people," your claim as to your favorite player goes unchallenged. It means making sure that "most people" agree with you, a fact which you will unceasingly refer to in order to bury the unconverted with popular opinion.

No, that's exactly the behavior of a "true fan(atic)."

[FONT="Times New Roman"]"There shall be no other players before thee."[/FONT]

[Whoah10115]

Funny thing about Bird was that he was the consensus GOAT until Jordan came along.

Using that logic, he should be somewhere on this list, but over the years his reputation has been somewhat recast by stat mongers overly focused on career numbers.

Bird wasn't consensus GOAT. I believe, with or without Michael, Magic had passed him in most people's eyes. And I also don't believe that he could be the consensus anyway. But I do agree with your overall point. And I don't even get what those stat mongers are talking about. I also don't get this revisionist history that Larry Bird didn't play defense. What player are they talking about?

LMARTFO
just so you know, Magic got #13 angry in the gym and Chamberlain announced "there will be no more layups in this gym"

and magic was done after that. If your guy can't drive on a old man that was retired 10 years what are we talkin about

With much respect, don't use that argument because people will not take you seriously. And they shouldn't. I don't care if Wilt said "no more layups". Stuff like that happens all the time. And the fact is that Wilt would not have been able to play in the league at any high level, in his 40's. He would not be able to play in the league in his 50's. Transplanted in his prime, he would not have put up most of the averages he put up in his day. And he would never average over 20RPG.



He might be the best in the league and he could average, at his best, 33 and 18 in the 80's or 90's...and that would put him in the discussion, absolutely. I still believe Michael and Magic are easily the two best players ever (really no argument for Kareem over Magic, with respect to everyone else's opinion), and I still believe Larry Bird is still the 3rd best player ever...but whatever. Wilt would be a monster. But let's not act like Walt Frazier and talk about 70 points or suggest he would put up the same numbers. And let's not act like Wilt, had he accepted a contract to play in the 80's, would show up and start beasting. It's not a question of respect for Wilt, but a complete disrespect to everyone else.

[La Frescobaldi]

I don't believe Bird was anywhere near consensus GOAT. I believe, with or without Michael, Magic has passed him in most people's eyes. And I also don't believe that he could be the consensus anyway. But I do agree with your overall point. And I don't even get what those stat mongers are talking about. I also don't get this revisionist history that Larry Bird didn't play defense. What player are they talking about?









With much respect, don't use that argument because people will not take you seriously. And they shouldn't. I don't care if Wilt said "no more layups". Stuff like that happens all the time. And the fact is that Wilt would not have been able to play in the league at any high level, in his 40's. He would not be able to play in the league in his 50's. Transplanted in his prime, he would not have put up most of the averages he put up in his day. And he would never average over 20RPG.



He might be the best in the league and he could average, at his best, 33 and 18 in the 80's or 90's...and that would put him in the discussion, absolutely. I still believe Michael and Magic are easily the two best players ever (really no argument for Kareem over Magic, with respect to everyone else's opinion), and I still believe Larry Bird is still the 3rd best player ever...but whatever. Wilt would be a monster. But let's not act like Walt Frazier and talk about 70 points or suggest he would put up the same numbers. And let's not act like Wilt, had he accepted a contract to play in the 80's, would show up and start beasting. It's not a question of respect for Wilt, but a complete disrespect to everyone else.

I wonder, why did the Nets offered him an NBA contract in '86 when the guy was almost 50 years old? They obviously thought he could still play. So did guys like Kiki, Larry Brown, Mark Eaton......... if you saw him playing volleyball or running on the beach in the late 70s/ early 80s you might have a different viewpoint. Dude was fast

As far as rebounds? If Howard & Love can get 15 rpg, Chamberlain is gonna throw up numbers.

He was the real deal in Philly, still to this day the greatest NBA force I've ever seen.

[CavaliersFTW]

Bird wasn't consensus GOAT. I believe, with or without Michael, Magic had passed him in most people's eyes. And I also don't believe that he could be the consensus anyway. But I do agree with your overall point. And I don't even get what those stat mongers are talking about. I also don't get this revisionist history that Larry Bird didn't play defense. What player are they talking about?









With much respect, don't use that argument because people will not take you seriously. And they shouldn't. I don't care if Wilt said "no more layups". Stuff like that happens all the time. And the fact is that Wilt would not have been able to play in the league at any high level, in his 40's. He would not be able to play in the league in his 50's. Transplanted in his prime, he would not have put up most of the averages he put up in his day. And he would never average over 20RPG.



He might be the best in the league and he could average, at his best, 33 and 18 in the 80's or 90's...and that would put him in the discussion, absolutely. I still believe Michael and Magic are easily the two best players ever (really no argument for Kareem over Magic, with respect to everyone else's opinion), and I still believe Larry Bird is still the 3rd best player ever...but whatever. Wilt would be a monster. But let's not act like Walt Frazier and talk about 70 points or suggest he would put up the same numbers. And let's not act like Wilt, had he accepted a contract to play in the 80's, would show up and start beasting. It's not a question of respect for Wilt, but a complete disrespect to everyone else.

His situation for averaging 50 (and then 45) was certainly rare and would probably not arrise in the 1980's. His Warriors team was relatively low in talent compared to over half the teams those two seasons. And every team was outgunned by the Celtics, so it was especially so for his team. In the off-season prior to 1961-62 the Warriors coach Frank McGuire and Wilt discussed how they would be in the best position to beat Boston. Frank McGuire has gone on record that he alone came up with the proposal that Wilt should aim for 50 per game - so that (in his eyes) they'd be in the best position to beat Boston. Wilt wasn't even sure he could do it. Remember he had only averaged a consistent 38ppg in both of his prior seasons. 38 leaping to 50 isn't a jump in ppg that could be done w/o a team plan to allow him to do it - his prime normal scoring clip when the team strategy wasn't strictly catered to get him the ball seems to be a still impressive ~38ppg. Frank McGuire was also a "new" Warriors coach that season so he had also asked Wilt how long he could play in games and the response was "Forever, I never get tired." So, he had not only a rare green light to play every minute, but he'd also had a coaches request to strive for that Mount-Everest 50 points every single game. His scenario of unlimited minutes and a personal request for the team to let him go balls-to-the-wall in scoring likely wouldn't happen in the 1980's... But he'd still be a dominating league leading caliber scorer. In the 80's or 90's I doubt any coach would ask him to "score less" right in the middle of his prime (as per Alex Hannum in 1967).

I'd say 36ppg would be Wilt's peak in the 80's or 90's if coaches didn't recognize his full potential and/or had a balanced team that didn't need him to be the 1 man offense, and in his prime a steady 34ppg for a number seasons. He'd probably decline to about 24-26ppg by the tail end of a 13-14 season career but with more careful shots on higher % than when he was doing 36ppg (probably record %'s too). He might even dip below 20ppg if he decided to pursue a very long career, in which case I'm sure he would ultimately switch team roles to defender/facilitator by his own choice. I agree about an 18rpg peak with probably 16-18 career avg. he was very rebound hungry and had incredible length and strength to get them before anyone else could but there just wouldn't be enough to go around for ~22-27. I think his career ppg would be about the same as it was from his era because I'm almost positive 80's and 90's coaches would never ask him to change his game and score less like the coaches did of his time, I can't think of any dominant scorer in the mass-marketing era that the league didn't want to simply build complimentary pieces around.

However: If he was on a bad team analagous to the early 60's Warriors... It is possible, that even with the era's different game pace, that Wilt could score in the 40+ppg range (Maybe not 50 though...). His stamina is why. If he had the same green lights and you get him the ball he's just gonna score with league leading fg%, and he's gonna score quickly because the era pace won't dictate his natural ability to run and initiate fast-breaks by blocking shots to guards/etc. He and Bill Russell ran teams ragged in the 60's. They are in large part the reason behind that era's game pace.

[WillC]

Oscar Robertson: The Most Underrated Player in NBA History.

And no, I'm not being swayed by his triple-double average - I couldn't give a damn about that.

I'm swayed by his incredible offensive repertoire and shooting, defensive tenacity, ball-handling and passing. He was truly a jack-of-all-trades.

Meanwhile, Wilt Chamberlain is clearly one of the top 3 players of all-time. He was a better defender than Kareem (by far), a better rebounder (by far), a better passer and inseparable offensively.

In fact, Wilt Chamberlain was a better player than Bill Russell too (anyone that saw them play will agree), but Russell fitted into a team system better and, therefore, you can argue that Russell deserves to be ranked ahead of Wilt since it is a team game after all.

However, if I'm drafting a team from scratch, Wilt is in my top 2 all-time.

[Champ]

Bird wasn't consensus GOAT. I believe, with or without Michael, Magic had passed him in most people's eyes. And I also don't believe that he could be the consensus anyway. But I do agree with your overall point. And I don't even get what those stat mongers are talking about. I also don't get this revisionist history that Larry Bird didn't play defense. What player are they talking about?

Consensus in that it was the majority opinion expressed at the time. In terms of Magic passing him, I don't believe that was ever widely expressed, even during Magic's ascendance in the late-80s - which is why we're still having the argument about who's better. In Magic's defense, there wasn't enough of a window when it was just him to gain as much GOAT coverage in the press.

In other words, the problem with the Magic argument was not Bird but Jordan, who by that point was already beginning to make his GOAT case. Even though more MVP's and championships were still in the offing, most sports writers and followers of the game could see the writing on the wall.

[rhythmic]

The Four Horsemen:

Magic Johnson, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Michael Jordan and Bill Russell.

[Champ]

My top 10 list:
1. MJ
2. Kareem
3. Russell
4. Magic
5. Bird
6. Wilt*
7. Shaq
8. Duncan
9. Kobe
10. Hakeem**

*I've struggle with where to put Wilt. He should either be #4 or #6. I've settled on #6, as much as it kills me.

**It kills me more to put Hakeem at #10. He had to go against some impossible competition in the 80s. But I gotta do it.

Oh and I've changed my list many times over the years. It's just impossible to give a specific ranking because of the hundreds of factors involved.

Not a bad list!

[TheMan]

The very fact that the OP started a GOAT thread, then turned right around and tried to include Lin, only after a few games. Tells me all I need to know about his level of understanding of the game. He really has none.







Moving on

1...I inserted Jeremy Lin, not CavaliersFTW
2...it was a joke based on all the hype Lin has been recieving...
3...you seriously need a sense of humor

[CavaliersFTW]

Oscar Robertson: The Most Underrated Player in NBA History.

And no, I'm not being swayed by his triple-double average - I couldn't give a damn about that.

I'm swayed by his incredible offensive repertoire and shooting, defensive tenacity, ball-handling and passing. He was truly a jack-of-all-trades.

Meanwhile, Wilt Chamberlain is clearly one of the top 3 players of all-time. He was a better defender than Kareem (by far), a better rebounder (by far), a better passer and inseparable offensively.

In fact, Wilt Chamberlain was a better player than Bill Russell too (anyone that saw them play will agree), but Russell fitted into a team system better and, therefore, you can argue that Russell deserves to be ranked ahead of Wilt since it is a team game after all.

However, if I'm drafting a team from scratch, Wilt is in my top 2 all-time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PvMq-eX_pNw&t=8m5s

[Legends66NBA7]

Oscar Robertson: The Most Underrated Player in NBA History.

Who

[Owl]

Oscar Robertson: The Most Underrated Player in NBA History.

And no, I'm not being swayed by his triple-double average - I couldn't give a damn about that.

I'm swayed by his incredible offensive repertoire and shooting, defensive tenacity, ball-handling and passing. He was truly a jack-of-all-trades.

Meanwhile, Wilt Chamberlain is clearly one of the top 3 players of all-time. He was a better defender than Kareem (by far), a better rebounder (by far), a better passer and inseparable offensively.

In fact, Wilt Chamberlain was a better player than Bill Russell too (anyone that saw them play will agree), but Russell fitted into a team system better and, therefore, you can argue that Russell deserves to be ranked ahead of Wilt since it is a team game after all.

However, if I'm drafting a team from scratch, Wilt is in my top 2 all-time.

Interesting.
I like Oscar but would be interested to see sources for the quality of his D. But I too would have him at any pantheon level.

I also like Wilt but I'm not too sure about the gap between him and Kareem. Wilt was a risk because of his personality (during the 67 title run he was letting other owners know he was available). I would say that the comps you suggest would be fair if not adjusting for era, but KAJ stood a cut above a very strong generation of centres in the 70's.