GOAT Ranking Formula

[K Xerxes]

I don't know how you account for longevity and what exact criteria it is based on, but peak play for me on the consensus top 10:

Jordan
Wilt
Shaq
Bird
Kareem
Hakeem
Magic
Russell
Duncan
Kobe

Just my opinion of course.

[Deuce Bigalow]

How about Rings+FMVPs+MVPs+All-NBA First Teams+All-Star Teams+Leading the league in a statistical category

MJ-51
Kareem-50
Wilt-46 (2 FMVPs)
Russell-44 (8 FMVPs)
Magic-38
Kobe- 5+2+1+11+15+2 = 36
Shaq- 4+3+1+8+15+2 = 33
Duncan- 4+3+2+10+14+0 = 33
Hakeem-30 ( added DPOYs)
Bird-29

[Ca$H]

I don't know how you account for longevity and what exact criteria it is based on, but peak play for me on the consensus top 10:

Jordan
Wilt
Shaq
Bird
Kareem
Hakeem
Magic
Russell
Duncan
Kobe

Just my opinion of course.

Kobe has the most all NBA 1st teams(11) and the most all NBA teams (15)
in NBA history. He is also the 4th leading scorer of all time. A sustained level
of excellence is what I am looking for. He has one title as top 15 player(3rd team), one as a top ten player(2nd team), and three as a top five player(1st team). These are all facts. P.S. You forgot LeBron on your list. Peak LeBron is better than peak Kobe.

[TerranOP]

This formula still isn't all that great since there's a good amount of subjectivity in your "peak play" ranking. Career/longevity can be more objective because we can use data to justify it, but it's really tough to support peak play rankings. This wouldn't be a huge deal if the peak play ranking didn't have such a huge influence on the final ranking. I think it's a nice try, but it's just too difficult to come up with something objective enough to be used consistently. There will always be haters and you can't satisfy everyone, but the subjectivity of peak play is a concrete flaw in your formula. That said, I don't think I could come up with anything better.

Also, why do you choose to use all-star selections but not MVPs? I feel like MVPs should have more weight in the end, but your justification for not using them should also apply to all-star selections since they are fan voted. All-defensive selections are also pretty suspect. Players like Lebron and Kobe should not be getting the number of all-defensive selections that they are. They can both be excellent defenders when they're motivated, but most of the time they just use their energy on offense.

[Ca$H]

This formula still isn't all that great since there's a good amount of subjectivity in your "peak play" ranking. Career/longevity can be more objective because we can use data to justify it, but it's really tough to support peak play rankings. This wouldn't be a huge deal if the peak play ranking didn't have such a huge influence on the final ranking. I think it's a nice try, but it's just too difficult to come up with something objective enough to be used consistently. There will always be haters and you can't satisfy everyone, but the subjectivity of peak play is a concrete flaw in your formula. That said, I don't think I could come up with anything better.

Also, why do you choose to use all-star selections but not MVPs? I feel like MVPs should have more weight in the end, but your justification for not using them should also apply to all-star selections since they are fan voted. All-defensive selections are also pretty suspect. Players like Lebron and Kobe should not be getting the number of all-defensive selections that they are. They can both be excellent defenders when they're motivated, but most of the time they just use their energy on offense.

I agree peak play ranking is very subjective. However, many people for some reason give the most weight to peak play and very little weight to career/longevity even though it is more objective. There is no perfect formula for ranking players, but I think it is fair for everyone to rank players
by giving equal weight to both categories.

[K Xerxes]

Kobe has the most all NBA 1st teams(11) and the most all NBA teams (15)
in NBA history. He is also the 4th leading scorer of all time. A sustained level
of excellence is what I am looking for. He has one title as top 15 player(3rd team), one as a top ten player(2nd team), and three as a top five player(1st team). These are all facts. P.S. You forgot LeBron on your list. Peak LeBron is better than peak Kobe.

Just because you are in the first team does not mean you are a top 5 player. It doesn't take depth of position into account.

Besides, there are different types of longevity. You could measure how long a player could sustain: : peak, prime, productive years etc. Kobe has been productive in his 17th year, Kareem was going until he was late 30s/40.

Or you could measure how long a player could sustain the status of 'best in the league'. Kareem was arguably the best in the entire 70s and early 80s (Moses overtook him by '81 IMO). Jordan would have been the best player from at least 90-98 had he not retired. Bird was the best player from 84-86, Magic from about 87-89, BUT 88 and 89 are very debatable with Jordan and I'd actually give Jordan the edge in 88 and 89.

Kobe's longevity comes from the fact that he is putting up ridiculous numbers at 35, but he never exerted a period of domination over the NBA, which is why it's arguable, depending on your criteria, that Jordan had top 2 longevity of all time and Kobe's longevity status takes a hit because his peak was never that high.

But, of course, this ALL depends on strength of the era.

I did not put LeBron on the list because he's still pending and not in the consensus top 10. I don't know where I'd put him as of his 12-13 form, but I'd put him above Russell perhaps?

[Rolando]

MVP+Rings+FMVP

Jordan = 17 pts

Bill Russell = 16 pts

Kareem 14 pts

Magic = 11 pts

Duncan = 9 pts

Shaq = 8 pts / Larry Bird = 8 pts / Kobe = 8 pts

Wilt = 7 pts

Lebron = 6 pts

Actually, not bad. Not bad at all.

[TerranOP]

Actually, not bad. Not bad at all.

I agree. It's simple enough to generally work for the top ten. And the only big exception to the rule is Horry (and the rest of the OP Celtics dynasty team).

[Magic 32]

I agree. It's simple enough to generally work for the top ten. And the only big exception to the rule is Horry (and the rest of the OP Celtics dynasty team).

And you can just eliminate him by requiring that one must have at least one of each.

[Ca$H]

I don't know why LeBron stans are mad about the formula since I have him
ranked #4 in peak rankings. His longevity/career accomplishments ranking is incomplete because it is way too early to give him an appropriate ranking.

[tgan3]

Win NBA Finals +8 points
Reach but lose NBA Finals +5 points
Failed to reach Playoffs -1 points

Finals MVP +15 points
Season MVP +15 points
Each NBA All-team appearance + 2 points

Do your math.

[Ca$H]

decided to bump this. Due to the controversy surrounding ESPN's ranking.

[Ca$H]

bump.