which critera for ranking players all time makes more sense. Kobe fans or Lebron fan

[kennethgriffin]

Rings by MVP/FMVP winners list

or

#of MVP's with rings as tie breakers

the kobe vs lebron agenda criteria for ranking players

whats closer to a realistic ranking ( giving token FMVP to bill russell for being named after it ) - finals mvps as tie breakers




Rings by mvp winners:

#1 - Russell ( 11 )
#2 - Jordan ( 6 )
#3 - Kareem ( 6 )
#4 - Magic ( 5 )
#5 - Kobe ( 5 )
#6 - Shaq ( 4 )
#6 - Duncan ( 4 )
#8 - Bird ( 3 )
#9 - Wilt ( 2 )
#10 - Lebron ( 2 )
#11 - Hakeem ( 2 )



MVPs with rings and FMVPs as tie breakers:

#1 Kareem ( 6 )
#2 Russell ( 5 )
#3 Jordan ( 5 )
#4 Lebron ( 4 )
#5 Wilt ( 4 )
#6 Magic ( 3 )
#7 Bird ( 3 )
#8 Moses ( 3 )
#9 Duncan ( 2 )
#10 Pettit ( 2 )
#11 Nash ( 2 )
#11 Karl ( 2 )





whats closer to the consensus top 11 best players in history

whats closer to what we can all agree on

what formula matches common sense?

[kennethgriffin]

under lebron fans criteria... jordan and lebron are separated by 1 spot

under kobe fans criteria... jordan and lebron are separated by 10 spots

which makes more sense?

[Chizdog]

List 2.

[Solefade]

why can't you do fmvps + mvps as tiebreaker?

[kennethgriffin]

why can't you do fmvps + mvps as tiebreaker?

tie breakers only separate guys with the same ring total anyway

it would really only switch duncan and shaq in the first list. but the point of this is to show #of mvp's dont matter. so why use them.

the mvp award is more of a club where members are voted in.

some guys get voted a ton cause theyre liked more

but even the hated guys get a token out of pitty like kobe, shaq, hakeem.. you know the media didnt like those guys





regardless... fact is kobe fans criteria matches what 99% of the consensus top 10 or 11 players are on ISH and around the web forums

[BoutPractice]

None of these criteria even begin to make sense. To start with, "rings by MVP" is meaningless because it doesn't tell you if they were playing at MVP level when they won it...

Kobe wasn't an "MVP" type player for all of his 5 rings. Shaq was the second best player in the 2006 team, Kareem was a second banana for several of his championships, etc.

[kennethgriffin]

None of these criteria even begin to make sense. To start with, "rings by MVP" is meaningless because it doesn't tell you if they were playing at MVP level when they won it...

Kobe wasn't an "MVP" type player for all of his 5 rings. Shaq was the second best player in the 2006 team, Kareem was a second banana for several of his championships, etc.

regardless of what you assume or think might be correct. fact is.......... my formula matches the accepted top 11 list 99% of the forum agrees to... and almost to a perfect order aswell...

there must be something to it

[Cocaine80s]

i can tell op has been thinking bout this shit everyday

[kennethgriffin]

#10 Pettit ( 2 )
#11 Nash ( 2 )
#11 Karl ( 2 )

to lebron fans.. these guys are better than

- shaquille oneal
- oscar robertson
- hakeem olajuwon
- kobe bryant

[T_L_P]

Rings + MVPs + Finals MVPs

Duncan: 9
Shaq: 8
Kobe: 8
LeBron: 8

[zoom17]

i can tell op has been thinking bout this shit everyday

[Mr. Jabbar]

imo the eye test is unbeatable, where kobe ranks 4-7 and lebron top 30

[DFish24]

Rings by MVP winners for sure.

[kennethgriffin]

Rings + MVPs + Finals MVPs

Duncan: 9
Shaq: 8
Kobe: 8
LeBron: 8

only problem is... something voted by espn at the end of a regular season isnt on the exact same level as a guy who leads his team to the championship


dominant statistical rings will always be worth more than an mvp


ask steve nash if he'd trade one of those mvps for kobes 2001 or 2002 rings

[RoundMoundOfReb]

Literally have never seen a LeBron fan who uses that criteria.