Backpick all time rankings..

[vcsgrizzfan]

The ones I had to stop and think about for a bit (so far) have been Reggie Miller, David Robinson, and Moses Malone (though I had started to come around a bit on lowering him wayyyyyy more than I had in the past, personally).

A Chris Paul 21st ranking is one of those things that just doesn't an initial smell test, but I think he did as good a job as you can do in defense of that opinion.

The scouting report on Miller was really well done. It made me rethink a few assumptions I had. Chris Paul is weird. He's an amazing player at times and has often made chicken salad out of chicken feathers, but then he has a propensity to dribble the ball off his foot at the WORST possible time.

and he’s repeatedly injured, among other things

I can’t get past the KG over Bird/Magic/Kobe thing. Yes he was a hell of a player, but come on!
Once a sports take that is supposed to be about metrics puts in these completely arbitrary lines in the sand, you’ve lost me.
It then seems to be about agenda more than anything else (and of course, yes, we all have agendas)

When you look at what he did with absolute tomato cans for the vast, vast majority of his time in Minnesota, it's pretty incredible. I'm looking forward to the scouting report. I agree though that I'm hugely surprised he can have him top 8 when a lot of the case has to be "what if".

[Bush4Ever35]

I can’t get past the KG over Bird/Magic/Kobe thing. Yes he was a hell of a player, but come on!
Once a sports take that is supposed to be about metrics puts in these completely arbitrary lines in the sand, you’ve lost me.
It then seems to be about agenda more than anything else (and of course, yes, we all have agendas)

KG being two-way dominant as a big defensive player who could *also* create is a huge boon vs. Bird/Magic/Kobe.

[Shill Jackson]

I can’t get past the KG over Bird/Magic/Kobe thing. Yes he was a hell of a player, but come on!
Once a sports take that is supposed to be about metrics puts in these completely arbitrary lines in the sand, you’ve lost me.
It then seems to be about agenda more than anything else (and of course, yes, we all have agendas)

KG being two-way dominant as a big defensive player who could *also* create is a huge boon vs. Bird/Magic/Kobe.

Well I could certainly name the other three’s “go to” offensive moves. KG I could not (except for maybe yelling at his opponent)

[FPL]

What really hurts Bird/Magic in the comparison is a lack of longevity. I think ElGee has said in the past that if Magic had played a few more years, he'd probably be in his top 3-4.

[FPL]

Anyhow I don't expect everybody to agree with ElGee (I disagree with him on a fair deal, even though I've read his stuff forever), but to get an idea of what he values, take a look at these two posts:

http://www.backpicks.com/2017/12/11/the ... a-history/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.backpicks.com/2018/02/12/bac ... r-ranking/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Bush4Ever35]

Well I could certainly name the other three’s “go to” offensive moves. KG I could not (except for maybe yelling at his opponent)

So what?

What matters is increasing your team's chances of winning.

KG in his prime had strong impact in pretty much every dimension of the game, and was exceptionally strong in a few.

It's not crazy to think a guy like that could have more impact than a Bird/Magic/Kobe, who were basically only heavily influential offensively, and in the case of Bird and Magic, capped by somewhat short longevity.

[Bush4Ever35]

Anyhow I don't expect everybody to agree with ElGee (I disagree with him on a fair deal, even though I've read his stuff forever), but to get an idea of what he values, take a look at these two posts:

http://www.backpicks.com/2017/12/11/the ... a-history/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.backpicks.com/2018/02/12/bac ... r-ranking/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Step 1: Film Study

Many people call this the eye test, but there are really two distinct elements to this:

First, what we consciously perceive when watching film. I have a good eye for some phenomena, but I miss others. If I watch a play with a sequence of passes that leads to a wide open shot, and I don’t immediately know who forced that action on offense and who made what decisions on defense, I missed something fundamental. Thankfully, we live in a digital world and can rewind to the beginning of the play with the click of a button. I do this on a lot of plays. (By the way, this is a good way to discover which color analysts have great eyes — they’ll tell you in realtime how a play materialized. Weaker analysts simply gawk at what happened on-ball.)

The other “eye test” component is just as important and is discussed extensively in Thinking Basketball: Your memory! Recalling dozens of actions in every game is impossible for most people. To combat my glitchy mental hard drive, I write it all down. I have a note-keeping system which I translate into a spreadsheet, allowing for both qual and quant analysis. For this series, I took over 500 pages of game notes and here’s what I learned: Comprehensively studying one player in the same game requires focus, watching two is mentally taxing and watching three or four at once is nearly impossible. And you won’t remember stuff from a few games ago.

So if you’re eye-testing games by ball-watching and then relying on memory, you’re going to miss out on areas that traditional metrics struggle to capture, namely passing and team defense. Not coincidentally, most people take umbrage with players I value differently on defense, and secondarily think I overrate good passers who were lesser scorers.

Practices: (1) Re-watch plays. (2) Takes notes to remember them. (3) Track passing, creation, on-ball habits, defensive errors, defensive rotations and man defense.


I wonder how many of the "I'm an ancient basketball sage combined with a supercomputer, so my eye test is superior to all....young padawan *smug smile*" folks do this.

The aspects that relate to memory and cognitive fallacies are something that I've screamed about for years on ESPN and elsewhere.

[vcsgrizzfan]

Anyhow I don't expect everybody to agree with ElGee (I disagree with him on a fair deal, even though I've read his stuff forever), but to get an idea of what he values, take a look at these two posts:

http://www.backpicks.com/2017/12/11/the ... a-history/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.backpicks.com/2018/02/12/bac ... r-ranking/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Step 1: Film Study

Many people call this the eye test, but there are really two distinct elements to this:

First, what we consciously perceive when watching film. I have a good eye for some phenomena, but I miss others. If I watch a play with a sequence of passes that leads to a wide open shot, and I don’t immediately know who forced that action on offense and who made what decisions on defense, I missed something fundamental. Thankfully, we live in a digital world and can rewind to the beginning of the play with the click of a button. I do this on a lot of plays. (By the way, this is a good way to discover which color analysts have great eyes — they’ll tell you in realtime how a play materialized. Weaker analysts simply gawk at what happened on-ball.)

The other “eye test” component is just as important and is discussed extensively in Thinking Basketball: Your memory! Recalling dozens of actions in every game is impossible for most people. To combat my glitchy mental hard drive, I write it all down. I have a note-keeping system which I translate into a spreadsheet, allowing for both qual and quant analysis. For this series, I took over 500 pages of game notes and here’s what I learned: Comprehensively studying one player in the same game requires focus, watching two is mentally taxing and watching three or four at once is nearly impossible. And you won’t remember stuff from a few games ago.

So if you’re eye-testing games by ball-watching and then relying on memory, you’re going to miss out on areas that traditional metrics struggle to capture, namely passing and team defense. Not coincidentally, most people take umbrage with players I value differently on defense, and secondarily think I overrate good passers who were lesser scorers.

Practices: (1) Re-watch plays. (2) Takes notes to remember them. (3) Track passing, creation, on-ball habits, defensive errors, defensive rotations and man defense.


I wonder how many of the "I'm an ancient basketball sage combined with a supercomputer, so my eye test is superior to all....young padawan *smug smile*" folks do this.

The aspects that relate to memory and cognitive fallacies are something that I've screamed about for years on ESPN and elsewhere.

Does your eye test tell you this is a cream puff era?

[Lamelo_Ball]

I can’t get past the KG over Bird/Magic/Kobe thing. Yes he was a hell of a player, but come on!
Once a sports take that is supposed to be about metrics puts in these completely arbitrary lines in the sand, you’ve lost me.
It then seems to be about agenda more than anything else (and of course, yes, we all have agendas)

KG being two-way dominant as a big defensive player who could *also* create is a huge boon vs. Bird/Magic/Kobe.

hes a better defender than kobe due to his positional value. sure


but he was pretty damn beta and ring chased for his only short term success where he was 3rd leading scorer on his team

KG's top 20 or so all time. but to put him above top 5 all time GOAT candidates is laughable

[elmouse03]

Kobe is behind the mailman?

[Lamelo_Ball]

Kobe is behind the mailman?

im used to online analytic virgins hating on kobe.


its all they have... every big name player worships kobe. most fans have him around top 5. thats all that matters in the end. i could make a list tomorrow and post a bunch of biased ranking formulas too

[Lamelo_Ball]

the way this guy set this thing up would lead me to believe hes placing lebron #1

not factoring in choking and total failures of guys only appearences in the finals like karl malone.


no doubt jordans getting the shaft. be ready to see a shit storm ensue after its all done

[elmouse03]

Kobe is behind the mailman?

im used to online analytic virgins hating on kobe.


its all they have... every big name player worships kobe. most fans have him around top 5. thats all that matters in the end. i could make a list tomorrow and post a bunch of biased ranking formulas too

You do that anyway when it comes to Kobe.

[Lamelo_Ball]

Kobe is behind the mailman?

im used to online analytic virgins hating on kobe.


its all they have... every big name player worships kobe. most fans have him around top 5. thats all that matters in the end. i could make a list tomorrow and post a bunch of biased ranking formulas too

You do that anyway when it comes to Kobe.

what online fan doesn't... everyone has an agenda


this is why player opinions are most valued. its much easier to tell the truth when you're not obsessed with someone... most players are their own biggest fan .... so when they give props to someone else its usually genuine

[Lamelo_Ball]

think about it like this... this year is one of lebrons most impressive offensive statistical seasons... but in reality hes just stat padding assists and rebounds by stagnating the offense and selling out his defense.. hes actually hurting his team with his stats. and thats what analytic geeks go by most

a guy could be 4th in the shitty ass eastern conference. destroyed 3 teams chemistry/personnel in under 1 calendar year. and still be worshipped.

[Master Spade]

think about it like this... this year is one of lebrons most impressive offensive statistical seasons... but in reality hes just stat padding assists and rebounds by stagnating the offense and selling out his defense.. hes actually hurting his team with his stats. and thats what analytic geeks go by most

a guy could be 4th in the shitty ass eastern conference. destroyed 3 teams chemistry/personnel in under 1 calendar year. and still be worshipped.

So much so that his own coach called him out on it.

[Sudanese Sensation]

He also has The Dream rated higher than most.

I wouldn't be surprised if he has The Big Fundamental in his top three.

[Lamelo_Ball]

He also has The Dream rated higher than most.

I wouldn't be surprised if he has The Big Fundamental in his top three.

why does anyone care who this random dude has in his top 3 when kobe/magic/bird arent in his top 10

[Sudanese Sensation]

He also has The Dream rated higher than most.

I wouldn't be surprised if he has The Big Fundamental in his top three.

why does anyone care who this random dude has in his top 3 when kobe/magic/bird arent in his top 10

Where do you rate this guy:


5× NBA champion (1999, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2014)
3× NBA Finals MVP (1999, 2003, 2005)
2× NBA Most Valuable Player (2002, 2003)
15× NBA All-Star (1998, 2000–2011, 2013, 2015)
NBA All-Star Game MVP (2000)
10× All-NBA First Team (1998–2005, 2007, 2013)
3× All-NBA Second Team (2006, 2008, 2009)
2× All-NBA Third Team (2010, 2015)
8× NBA All-Defensive First Team (1999–2003, 2005, 2007, 2008)
7× NBA All-Defensive Second Team (1998, 2004, 2006, 2009, 2010, 2013, 2015)
NBA Rookie of the Year (1998)
NBA Teammate of the Year (2015)
No. 21 retired by San Antonio Spurs
USA Basketball Male Athlete of the Year (2003)
Sports Illustrated Sportsman of the Year (2003)
National college player of the year (1997)
2× Consensus first-team All-American (1996, 1997)
3× NABC Defensive Player of the Year (1995–1997)
2× ACC Player of the Year (1996, 1997)
No. 21 retired by Wake Forest

[Bush4Ever35]

Griff is needy for attention in this thread.

Pretty sad.

Although it seems to be two days in a row he got up before noon, so that's a positive sign.