Backpick all time rankings..

[Y2K]

I like the writeup of his offense, but the ratings are a bit weird. Ben rails against Shaq's defense, even in aspects that one would think are his strengths (paint protection and man defense), yet rates him reasonably well in that regard. Meh.

Shaq was my first favorite player and the guy who got me into the league, so it's good to see him getting some respect. Generally, I think people place a ceiling on him and he's usually in the bottom half of top 10s, so it's fun to see someone who took his list seriously putting him in the top 5.

I went back and looked at game footage of Shaq post-2000 and I must say that he looks worse than I have him credit for. As nimble and quick as he was on offense, he appeared every bit as clumsy and slow on defense.

[Bush4Ever35]

#4 Bill Russell

http://www.backpicks.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Y2K]

#4 Bill Russell

http://www.backpicks.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

That puts LeBron James in the top 3. Not surprised to see this.

[Bush4Ever35]

Just finished the Russell write-up. Absolutely loved it.

It feels nice to be validated with higher-level quantitative data on some points the "pro-Russell" crowd has been making for quite some time:

1. How Boston was actually a fairly modest offensive team
2. How Wilt got volume numbers against him *at the expense of* efficiency and global offense
3. How Boston dropped like a rock without Russell versus with Russell (while Russell was an active player)

And so on...

Edit: TDK, don't read the writeup. Your head might explode as a function about being comically wrong about literally major point of contention you've had with the "pro-Russell bloc" over the years.

[vcsgrizzfan]

#4 Bill Russell

http://www.backpicks.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

That puts LeBron James in the top 3. Not surprised to see this.

I'm disappointed. I knew there was no way Russell would get number 1, but I had a faint hope he might get 2. I still consider him GOAT myself.

[Bush4Ever35]

I think some longevity-based things (even era-adjusted) might hold Russell back a touch.

Russell has 10 MVP seasons and 7 all-time seasons per the write-up.

Lebron has been at an MVP-level since 2005 and has been eerily consistent all the way to the present day. Without doing the deep-dive Ben Taylor is doing, at a surface-level one could argue Lebron has been having MVP caliber seasons since 2005 (though I don't know if his seasons were "MVP" vs. "Weak MVP" using Ben Taylor's categorization). Certainly, at least a handful of those seasons like 2009 and 2013 are all-time seasons.

Kareem probably matched Russell (roughly) in terms of MVP-level seasons and all-time seasons, but with the bonus of a number of quality years on the books in the 80s (perhaps about 5-6 seasons in the 80s?).

[vcsgrizzfan]

I think some longevity-based things (even era-adjusted) might hold Russell back a touch.

Russell has 10 MVP seasons and 7 all-time seasons per the write-up.

Lebron has been at an MVP-level since 2005 and has been eerily consistent all the way to the present day. Without doing the deep-dive Ben Taylor is doing, at a surface-level one could argue Lebron has been having MVP caliber seasons since 2005 (though I don't know if his seasons were "MVP" vs. "Weak MVP" using Ben Taylor's categorization). Certainly, at least a handful of those seasons like 2009 and 2013 are all-time seasons.

Kareem probably matched Russell (roughly) in terms of MVP-level seasons and all-time seasons, but with the bonus of a number of quality years on the books in the 80s (perhaps about 5-6 seasons in the 80s?).

He definitely gets hurt by longevity. But the writeup again points out over and over again that he was the stick that stirred the Celtics drink. No Cousy, no problem. No Sharman, no problem. No Jones, no problem. No Russell, BIG problem.

[Bush4Ever35]

CORP Values (Career) - you'll see ElGee's rankings don't exactly follow his CORP numbers.

What's interesting is that there is a pretty dramatic drop from 18 to 20 (and even 18 to 19). The drop from 18 to 20 (0.55) is about the same in absolute terms as the difference between 7 and 18 (0.54).

Another noticeable drop is between Wilt (2.33, 9th), and Magic (2.00, 10th). A difference of 0.33 while the difference between Russell at 4 and Wilt at 9 isn't even 0.33...

Things like this might be helpful if you are a person who thinks in "tiers" rather than ordinal lists.

4. Russell 2.63
5. Shaq 2.59
6. Hakeem 2.56
7. Duncan 2.47
8. KG 2.43
9. Wilt 2.33
10. Magic 2.00
11. Bird 1.90
12. Oscar 1.91
13. Karl 1.98
14. Kobe 2.06
15. Robinson 1.94
16. Dr.J 1.84
17. West 1.75
18. Dirk 1.93
19. Nash 1.57
20. Barkley 1.38
21. CP3 1.36
22. Wade 1.25
23. Pippen 1.26
24. Moses 1.20
25. Stockton 1.33
26. Durant 1.23
27. Ewing 1.20
28. Barry 1.16
29. Miller 1.24
30. Pettit 1.03
31. Hondo 1.11
32. Curry 1.05
33. Frazier 1.01
34. Kidd 1.09
35. Pierce 1.10
36. Gilmore 1.04
37. Baylor 0.96
38. McHale 0.93
39. Drexler 0.97
40. Allen 1.11

[vcsgrizzfan]

Just finished the Russell write-up. Absolutely loved it.

It feels nice to be validated with higher-level quantitative data on some points the "pro-Russell" crowd has been making for quite some time:

1. How Boston was actually a fairly modest offensive team
2. How Wilt got volume numbers against him *at the expense of* efficiency and global offense
3. How Boston dropped like a rock without Russell versus with Russell (while Russell was an active player)

And so on...

Edit: TDK, don't read the writeup. Your head might explode as a function about being comically wrong about literally major point of contention you've had with the "pro-Russell bloc" over the years.

I think his defense is also very portable across eras. That incredible lateral quickness and leaping ability and the fact you could switch him on ANYONE on screen and roll would make him every bit as valuable today on the defensive end. His impact would be huge. Going "small" to try to limit his impact would be pretty much useless.

[Bush4Ever35]

Basketball is a "team" sport, fool... and as bush pointed out Russ was a great "helper", but he sure wasn't a one-on-one / lock-down Defender. In fact, evidenced by the facts in the OP he was probably below-average in that facet.

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=63779&hilit=Russell+defense" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[vcsgrizzfan]

Basketball is a "team" sport, fool... and as bush pointed out Russ was a great "helper", but he sure wasn't a one-on-one / lock-down Defender. In fact, evidenced by the facts in the OP he was probably below-average in that facet.

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=63779&hilit=Russell+defense" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

TheDunningKruger btfo ITT.

[Bush4Ever35]

TDK is such a dumb fuck.

I hope he isn't online now and preparing a nonsensical retort to this avalanche of evidence.

[Bush4Ever35]

Mr. Leebron Jammies in the 3rd spot. Tiny shock (I was expecting Kareem, but maybe it's longevity related?)

I'm reading the writeup now:

http://www.backpicks.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[AbeVigodaLive]

Mr. Leebron Jammies in the 3rd spot. Tiny shock (I was expecting Kareem, but maybe it's longevity related?)

I'm reading the writeup now:

http://www.backpicks.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Funny that Lew Alcindor would lose out to anybody based on longevity accolades. The old ninny played for so damn long.

[Bush4Ever35]

Mr. Leebron Jammies in the 3rd spot. Tiny shock (I was expecting Kareem, but maybe it's longevity related?)

I'm reading the writeup now:

http://www.backpicks.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Funny that Lew Alcindor would lose out to anybody based on longevity accolades. The old ninny played for so damn long.

If you conceptualize career value the way the author has, it's certainly plausible Kareem has had the most valuable *career*, and that Lebron is probably going to have it in the future barring injury or insanity.

To use his terms, two "weak MVP" seasons are comparable or potentially even more valuable than a single all-time great season.

Kareem was 1st or 2nd in PER every single year between 1970 and 1981 (with at least "good to very good" defense, although from some things I've read...perhaps not elite-elite), and from maybe another 5 "weak MVP" type seasons after that...that's going to be brutal to top, even though Jordan peaked higher and definitely had a better "5/7 year run".

[AbeVigodaLive]

Mr. Leebron Jammies in the 3rd spot. Tiny shock (I was expecting Kareem, but maybe it's longevity related?)

I'm reading the writeup now:

http://www.backpicks.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Funny that Lew Alcindor would lose out to anybody based on longevity accolades. The old ninny played for so damn long.

If you conceptualize career value the way the author has, it's certainly plausible Kareem has had the most valuable *career*, and that Lebron is probably going to have it in the future barring injury or insanity.

To use his terms, two "weak MVP" seasons are comparable or potentially even more valuable than a single all-time great season.

Kareem has a ton of those types of seasons on the books, even though Jordan probably peaked higher and definitely had a better "5/7 year" type run.

Eventually, I'm gonna go read all that stuff.

And I'll probably have a lot I want to talk about... but it will be too late. The thread/interest will be over by then.

[Sudanese Sensation]

Backpicks GOAT: #3 LeBron James

[Bush4Ever35]

Eventually, I'm gonna go read all that stuff.

And I'll probably have a lot I want to talk about... but it will be too late. The thread/interest will be over by then.

I think it would be a good idea for the mods to sticky this thread.

It would be a cool, focused basketball discussion...there's so much material to work with.

[Sudanese Sensation]

Like Nash, LeBron was supercharging dependent talent — finishers who disproportionately benefited from shots served to them on a silver platter. So with his talents in South Beach, Cleveland crumbled in 2011. While most teams fall off after losing a superstar, none imploded like the Lebron-less Cavs; in 21 games with a similar group of players, they played at an anemic 18-win pace (-8.9 SRS) before injuries ravaged their lineup. LeBron’s not worth 40 wins on a typical club, but no player in history has correlated more strongly with such massive, worst-to-first impact.7

...


I do wonder if I’m undervaluing LeBron, given the unique shape of his offense.

[AbeVigodaLive]

Eventually, I'm gonna go read all that stuff.

And I'll probably have a lot I want to talk about... but it will be too late. The thread/interest will be over by then.

I think it would be a good idea for the mods to sticky this thread.

It would be a cool, focused basketball discussion...there's so much material to work with.

Nah. No room.

We need to keep the Projected Bulls/Magic Win thread. Forever.