How do you guys rank players you've NEVER seen play?!

[KayHaven]

I'm 30 years old and don't feel comfortable talking about any player that played prior to 1992-93.

I don't even like talking about Magic and Bird..


My point is...half the board is like under the age of 25....how in the world can you guys talk about Wilt, Dr. J , Jerry West, Bill Russel

Imagine your 8 year old brother telling you how awesome Kobe was 10 years from now:facepalm

I don't get it.

[Cocaine80s]

I have been watching this game for over 35 years now and truly believe Lebron is the greatest behind Jordan

[Fire Colangelo]

Um, some people like basketball enough to revisit the older games during the summer?

I'm okay with it in all honesty, I'd much rather read a thread about older players than a Kobe/LeBron/Jordan thread.


unless it's a wilt thread.

[KayHaven]

Um, some people like basketball enough to revisit the older games during the summer?

I'm okay with it in all honesty, I'd much rather read a thread about older players than a Kobe/LeBron/Jordan thread.


unless it's a wilt thread.


I just don't think watching 3 NBA classic games on NBA TV means your an expert on 1980's basketball..

[nzahir]

I'm 30 years old and don't feel comfortable talking about any player that played prior to 1992-93.

I don't even like talking about Magic and Bird..


My point is...half the board is like under the age of 25....how in the world can you guys talk about Wilt, Dr. J , Jerry West, Bill Russel

Imagine your 8 year old brother telling you how awesome Kobe was 10 years from now:facepalm

I don't get it.
People, myself as well, go off stats, full games, highlights, what other older analysts say, and matchup highlights.

[Phenith]

I'm 30 years old and don't feel comfortable talking about any player that played prior to 1992-93.

I don't even like talking about Magic and Bird..


My point is...half the board is like under the age of 25....how in the world can you guys talk about Wilt, Dr. J , Jerry West, Bill Russel

Imagine your 8 year old brother telling you how awesome Kobe was 10 years from now:facepalm

I don't get it.

I'm in the same boat, I don't have an all time top 10 unless I base it off stats, accomplishments and limited video footage(which is usually just highlights which embellish a players good while hiding his bad moments).
This is why I never weigh in with strong opinions when it comes to old school players.
I've seen way too many threads where it's pretty obvious a person or people haven't even seen a certain player play, but they are adamant that he is great/awesome/goat/whatever and all I can do is leave that thread, there is no point arguing with people who believe they are right despite not having a clue what they are talking about.

I like scanning threads on older players just to see what people are saying about old school players, but it's usually just jiberish and pointless arguing between people who convinced their opinion is the right one... lol

opinion = there is no "right one", it's just your feelings on a player

[G0ATbe]

True:lol . Like with Jordan for instance, most people only think of him so highly based on youtube vids and what they hear from the media. Any knowledgable person who watched him should know he was not GOAT level. Far from it.

[kennethgriffin]

Ive seen enough footage.. we live in an era where everything is accessible...


Its like saying "oh well i dunno if hitler was all that bad. Sure theres evidence of everything he did.. but i wasnt alive back then. So who knows. It could all be bureaucratic jibbery joo

[IncarceratedBob]

Eh, I just watch alot of YouTube. I never saw MJ play and honestly didn't see any of Kobe's prime either. I started watching the NBA religiously my 6th grade year and that was 2013 so the greatest player I've ever seen is LeBron with KD and Davis next in line.

[Levity]

I'm sure it's no exaggeration if i say that most of the posters opinions on here (espeically for older players) are just rehashed statements from articles they read, quotes they heard, or stuff other posters have said in the past. (which ironically is most likely rehashed fluff to begin with) And they try to make it sound like it's their own thinking.

either that, or everyone on here is 35+ years old and have been die hard bball since before they hit double digits

[kennethgriffin]

I have been watching this game for over 35 years now and truly believe Lebron is the greatest behind Jordan


Insecure as f*ck lol



I watched mj, kobe and bran... i can honestly say youre full of it


Lebrons 2 for 6 must have slipped by you when your eyes were closed


If he truly was as great as you say he is he'd have a winning finals record.

[KayHaven]

You guys who are saying you watch YouTube videos and old footage.......


Imagine if you will....


It's 2025 and your arguing with a 20 year old about who was the more deserving MVP player in the 2015 season...harden or Steph....you on one hand watched the whole season...knew how each player reacted in big spots during the season and big spots against other star players...the 20 year old is basing his argument off 3 steph curry highlights he put on CP3...it's just stupid.

[Fire Colangelo]

I just don't think watching 3 NBA classic games on NBA TV means your an expert on 1980's basketball..

Like some other posters said... everything is accessible on the internet nowadays.

Even the people who are old enough probably didn't watch every game of Magic/Bird's career, add nostalgia on top of that and you get very very biased opinions. Do those opinions matter more to you?

[KayHaven]

More importantly ...I can barely find 3 full Ray Allen games from the 90's how the hell are finding multiple videos on players from the 70's and 80's

[Marchesk]

You rank them based on how successful their career was relative to everyone else's career. If that means you put Mikan in the top 10, then so be it.

[Marchesk]

The eye test is subjective, how anyone would do in another era is opinion, how someone would have done with different teammates and coaches is also opinion, whether Lebron would school Dr J (in his prime) one on one is opinion and irrelevant, and so forth.

The only semi-objective criteria is their career accomplishments, both as individuals and as part of a team. You can say all you want that someone like Cousy wouldn't make the D League, but that's total opinion and irrelevant even if true, because Cousy didn't grow up today and you can't have players today grow up back then to see how they would have done.

How many titles would MJ have without Pippen? No way to know. How many titles would Wilt have had on the Celtics? Again, unknowable. So you go off what players actually did.

[kshutts1]

You rank them based on how successful their career was relative to everyone else's career. If that means you put Mikan in the top 10, then so be it.
I count myself among the handful of posters that are able to appreciate the older players and the newer ones.

I do that by reading, listening and watching a lot. And then also considering what Marchesk touched on... Performance relative to peers.

And that last point is one of the most key points, honestly, and it's why I despise current AS votes and, to a smaller extent, MVP and All-NBA votes being heavily influenced by team record.

Semi- example of performance relative to peers...
When someone that appreciates the 60s mentions Wilt's or Oscar's '62 season, a lot of detractors scream "Pace!" "Short white men!" "Era!", etc, yet they fail to mention that...
Wilt's '62 season has the "record" for largest PPG% differential between first and second place
No one else was averaging over 40ppg, much less 50.
No one else averaged a triple double, much less a 30ppg triple double, or even close.
Look at their FG% relative to league average.

I don't want to start a discussion, so I hope I didn't rustle any jimmies, so to speak, but I thought that would be a good way to make a point.

[fpliii]

I don't. I think it's hard in general, because League Pass didn't exist before 94-95.

Unless someone was in-market for a certain team before then, it must have been very difficult to watch games for a variety of players. I was far too young in the 80s to watch ball, but from my understanding the same few teams were typically in national games (Boston/LA/Philly; the Bulls were on WGN later on and before League Pass which you could get all over of course). Can't comment on anything earlier that.

It's easy to trade for games now (on sites like ihaveplanet.com), and maybe that was an option back then too. For me personally though, it takes a good number of games to form an opinion on a player.

I respect the hell out of someone who can form an opinion from only limited footage. There are some guys here with very good eyes who can spot things right away. But I need a larger sample. I don't really rank players anymore, but it would be ignorant and disrespectful of me to try and make a GOAT list of guys going way back to the 60s and 70s (aside from Kareem, who has a lot of games of him available, and Walton, who doesn't have a ton of games but his prime/peak was very short). Fortunately there are a lot of games from the 80s available, so some day I would like to have very strong and informed opinions on the stars from that era.

[kennethgriffin]

I don't. I think it's hard in general, because League Pass didn't exist before 94-95.

Unless someone was in-market for a certain team before then, it must have been very difficult to watch games for a variety of players. I was far too young in the 80s to watch ball, but from my understanding the same few teams were typically in national games (Boston/LA/Philly; the Bulls were on WGN later on and before League Pass which you could get all over of course). Can't comment on anything earlier that.

It's easy to trade for games now (on sites like ihaveplanet.com), and maybe that was an option back then too. For me personally though, it takes a good number of games to form an opinion on a player.

I respect the hell out of someone who can form an opinion from only limited footage. There are some guys here with very good eyes who can spot things right away. But I need a larger sample. I don't really rank players anymore, but it would be ignorant and disrespectful of me to try and make a GOAT list of guys going way back to the 60s and 70s (aside from Kareem, who has a lot of games of him available, and Walton, who doesn't have a ton of games but his prime/peak was very short). Fortunately there are a lot of games from the 80s available, so some day I would like to have very strong and informed opinions on the stars from that era.


holy **** a fpliii sighting




i gave up on anger G btw.. not enough traffic. and for some reason theyre all obsessed with the bulls and derrick rose. not really worth my time lol

[iamgine]

I'm 30 years old and don't feel comfortable talking about any player that played prior to 1992-93.

I don't even like talking about Magic and Bird..


My point is...half the board is like under the age of 25....how in the world can you guys talk about Wilt, Dr. J , Jerry West, Bill Russel

Imagine your 8 year old brother telling you how awesome Kobe was 10 years from now:facepalm

I don't get it.
Oh yeah geez how can we talk about Einstein, Hitler, Industrial Revolution, Cleopatra, The Civil War, etc.

[fpliii]

holy **** a fpliii sighting




i gave up on anger G btw.. not enough traffic. and for some reason theyre all obsessed with the bulls and derrick rose. not really worth my time lol
lol

In general I have cut down my message board posting, too busy recently.

[kennethgriffin]

this is how you rank players


a) watch them or their highlights/recorded games

b) compare them

c) see whos on the same level

d) divide them by accolades/achievements/matchups/awards/records while giving fair but honest +'s and -'s based on asterisks/era's/competition/finals win% etc...

e) use common sense

f) have a legitimate debate

g) come up with an order based on all the above

[Beastmode88]

this is how you rank players


a) watch them or their highlights/recorded games

b) compare them

c) see whos on the same level

d) divide them by accolades/achievements/matchups/awards/records while giving fair but honest +'s and -'s based on asterisks/era's/competition/finals win% etc...

e) use common sense

f) have a legitimate debate

g) come up with an order based on all the above

so mj > kobe. got it.

[SugarHill]

fpliii sighting

[kennethgriffin]

so mj > kobe. got it.


in terms of all time rankings.. sure

MJ still thinks kobe would beat him 1 on 1 ... thats all that matters

[Bless Mathews]

True:lol . Like with Jordan for instance, most people only think of him so highly based on youtube vids and what they hear from the media. Any knowledgable person who watched him should know he was not GOAT level. Far from it.


Your a fuccin idiot.


Jordan is goat of all goats you ignorant 19 year old sack of shit

[NZStreetBaller]

I just go off the opinions of everyone else. This board basically gives me what i need to know with a bit of youtube. Seriously who even cares that much that they actually research and stuff.... at the end of the day our opinions and how we rank players is completely irrelevant.

[bigkingsfan]

Copy some other person list, switch a few names around.

[RightToCensor]

Game Footage is accessible on YouTube and on NBA's GameTime App.

Get with the times, I can watch a full games of a full playoff series with the click of a button.

This debate needs to die already. Welcome to the 21st Century.

[livingby3's]

Game Footage is accessible on YouTube and on NBA's GameTime App.

Get with the times, I can watch a full games of a full playoff series with the click of a button.

This debate needs to die already. Welcome to the 21st Century.

u obviously didn't read through the thread to see what op had stated.

to op. in a way I can agree that making judgment of something u had never witness can be kinda stupid. but comparisons will continue to exist and people will stay making theirs with records they had seen/heard.

think about what will happen 50 years from now. no one would have actually watched any 60s 70s or even 80s basketball, and if there is still basketball by then, people will continue to make their judgment off records of what we had today.
it's not just for basketball, but for everything else.

unless someone does comes up with a time machine to actually send someone back to witness the past era

[SHAQisGOAT]

Watching most of the available footage (so not like you've NEVER seen play), realizing one's impact towards winning, checking the accolades and going through the stats within context, reading articles, viewing who did who, considering competition and teammates, so on...

[MP.Trey]

How does a history teacher teach about events he/she never saw? By doing research, that's how.

[Bless Mathews]

How does a history teacher teach about events he/she never saw? By doing research, that's how.

True.

But the difference is people give their OPINION and claim thy think they know players are better or not.

Dats the main difference.

I'm old. I've studied the NBA since the 80's.

Mj is by far the goat of all goats.


It's not even close.

[TheMan]

I have been watching this game for over 35 years now and truly believe Lebron is the greatest behind Jordan
I've been watching since the mid 80s and I'll say peak MJ is GOAT, followed by peak Shaq, then peak LBJ, Bird, Magic and Hakeem. Kobe, TDuncan and KG round out the top tier elite players I've seen. Next tier is DWade, KDurant, DRobinson, PEwing, Pippen, KMalone, Barkley etc.

[fpliii]

I've been watching since the mid 80s and I'll say peak MJ is GOAT, followed by peak Shaq, then peak LBJ, Bird and Magic. Kobe, TDuncan and KG round out the top tier elite players I've seen. Next tier is DWade, KDurant, DRobinson, PEwing, Pippen, KMalone, Barkley etc.
My dude, where's Dream?

[tpols]

Watching documentaries and stuff.. watched bird and magic docs on right now, have many times but theyre so interesting. On one hand you get all the back hand accounts and footage, interviews and whatnot, but on the other hand its made and pictured purely to romanticize.. Combining it with older posters knowledge gives a good feel for context though.

[TheMan]

My dude, where's Dream?
I corrected it, he's in the peak LBJ, Bird and Magic group :lol

I had a brain fart

[fpliii]

I corrected it, he's in the peak LBJ, Bird and Magic group :lol

I had a brain fart
:rockon:

[Milbuck]

Watching documentaries and stuff.. watched bird and magic docs on right now, have many times but theyre so interesting. On one hand you get all the back hand accounts and footage, interviews and whatnot, but on the other hand its made and pictured purely to romanticize.. Combining it with older posters knowledge gives a good feel for context though.
This is a big deal imo and one of the reasons I don't put much stock into them at all.

I can't imagine how incredible Lebron, Kobe, Duncan, etc are gonna look in documentaries 20 years from now when like 90% of the black marks of their career are cut out and the remaining 10% is only left in there to show them "tackling adversity" or some dumb shit. They're gonna look like gods.

[tpols]

This is a big deal imo and one of the reasons I don't put much stock into them at all.

I can't imagine how incredible Lebron, Kobe, Duncan, etc are gonna look in documentaries 20 years from now when like 90% of the black marks of their career are cut out and the remaining 10% is only left in there to show them "tackling adversity" or some dumb shit. They're gonna look like gods.

yea that's true.. but the thing is they do advertise general sentiments. Like all I've ever heard about Bird is how clutch and badass he was. There's no stat for it, but if you just look at his body language on tape it just tells you all you need to know. The way he punished people, the trash talk, you wouldn't know about that fully even if you watched the games live because live is from a birds eye view but these docs put you right on the sideline.



Like a doc about Duncan and LeBron might advertise how they were insane all around players but are they going to be able to provide enough ancedotes and sideline footage to make them out to be some 'clutch' stereotype? They wouldn't be able to. They'll play on their strengths but theyre not going to just make stuff up. So the docs are still somewhat useful giving you the gist of a player. It's way better to watch docs imo than just looking up boxscores because theres no context there.

[mehyaM24]

This is a big deal imo and one of the reasons I don't put much stock into them at all.

I can't imagine how incredible Lebron, Kobe, Duncan, etc are gonna look in documentaries 20 years from now when like 90% of the black marks of their career are cut out and the remaining 10% is only left in there to show them "tackling adversity" or some dumb shit. They're gonna look like gods.

alot of what's said about larry is true though. he absolutely lives up to the hype.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-Hf-3XvAyk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a3lAuohZvnE

you can find a myriad of lebron highlights, and while he's one of my favorite players ever, he just doesn't have the same basketball iq or clutch shots bird had.

bird is arguably the smartest player ever tbqh. goat basketball feel

[DMAVS41]

yea that's true.. but the thing is they do advertise general sentiments. Like all I've ever heard about Bird is how clutch and badass he was. There's no stat for it, but if you just look at his body language on tape it just tells you all you need to know. The way he punished people, the trash talk, you wouldn't know about that fully even if you watched the games live because live is from a birds eye view but these docs put you right on the sideline.



Like a doc about Duncan and LeBron might advertise how they were insane all around players but are they going to be able to provide enough ancedotes and sideline footage to make them out to be some 'clutch' stereotype? They wouldn't be able to. They'll play on their strengths but theyre not going to just make stuff up. So the docs are still somewhat useful giving you the gist of a player. It's way better to watch docs imo than just looking up boxscores because theres no context there.

But Bird also had his fair share of underwhelming playoff results. I'm not saying Bird wasn't great, but he'd be more criticized today than he was back in the 80's based on some of those results.

And you could definitely find plenty of footage to make both Duncan and Lebron seem incredibly clutch. I don't see how one could assert otherwise.

[mehyaM24]

But Bird also had his fair share of underwhelming playoff results. I'm not saying Bird wasn't great, but he'd be more criticized today than he was back in the 80's based on some of those results.

And you could definitely find plenty of footage to make both Duncan and Lebron seem incredibly clutch. I don't see how one could assert otherwise.
as clutch as bird? not a chance in hell.

in a draft, if all things remained equal, i would probably take lebron over bird because of his athleticism, but more importantly his durability and the fact he was a better defender.

[tpols]

But Bird also had his fair share of underwhelming playoff results. I'm not saying Bird wasn't great, but he'd be more criticized today than he was back in the 80's based on some of those results.

And you could definitely find plenty of footage to make both Duncan and Lebron seem incredibly clutch. I don't see how one could assert otherwise.

I know but there's a difference between having poor stats while getting bounced in a tough conference multiple times and just contextual clutchness/choking. Has Duncan ever been a guy who buried teams with dominant burst stretches? Not really.. hes kinda the guy who slowly kills you in the flow with all around dominance. Or has duncan any near the amount of ancedotes/stories about him doing this contextual type of stuff? He hasn't.. Lebron has to a slightly higer extent, but hes also had contextual chokes/drop-offs that Bird never had.. and obviously doesn't have 1/10th the amount of ancedotes where he did things in an almost unbelievablely badass way. They would have to be making things up.. or just flashing a chart of stats with certain arbitrary conditions attached.

[DMAVS41]

I know but there's a difference between having poor stats while getting bounced in a tough conference multiple times and just contextual clutchness/choking. Has Duncan ever been a guy who buried teams with dominant burst stretches? Not really.. hes kinda the guy who slowly kills you in the flow with all around dominance. Or has duncan any near the amount of ancedotes/stories about him doing this contextual type of stuff? He hasn't.. Lebron has to a slightly higer extent, but hes also had contextual chokes/drop-offs that Bird never had.. and obviously doesn't have 1/10th the amount of ancedotes where he did things in an almost unbelievablely badass way. They would have to be making things up.. or just flashing a chart of stats with certain arbitrary conditions attached.

I wasn't saying that Duncan or Lebron were as good as Bird in clutch situations.

I'm saying that one could easily compile video evidence that you alluded to. Certainly with Lebron you could...dude has an insane amount of positive clutch moments so far in his career.

With Lebron it's not the lack of clutch moments...it's his horrible choking at critical times that hurts him. So if that was edited out like the other poster talked about...he absolutely could be made to look as clutch as Bird.

[DMAVS41]

as clutch as bird? not a chance in hell.

in a draft, if all things remained equal, i would probably take lebron over bird because of his athleticism, but more importantly his durability and the fact he was a better defender.

i didn't say Lebron was as clutch as bird.

i said he could have a video compilation making him look like that. i think you guys are really selling Lebron short on just how many clutch moments he's had throughout this career.

[mehyaM24]

i didn't say Lebron was as clutch as bird.

i said he could have a video compilation making him look like that. i think you guys are really selling Lebron short on just how many clutch moments he's had throughout this career.

saying bird was definitively more clutch than lebron isn't selling him short.

[GimmeThat]

I think at first, it comes down to separating athletes and sportsman.

[DMAVS41]

saying bird was definitively more clutch than lebron isn't selling him short.

well, if i made an argument that equated bird and lebron in terms of being clutch....your post would make sense.

as i didn't say that...or intimate that at all....your post isn't relevant to me.

[mehyaM24]

well, if i made an argument that equated bird and lebron in terms of being clutch....your post would make sense.

as i didn't say that...or intimate that at all....your post isn't relevant to me.

....so how am i selling him short? :wtf:

[Prometheus]

I'm 30 years old and don't feel comfortable talking about any player that played prior to 1992-93.

I don't even like talking about Magic and Bird..


My point is...half the board is like under the age of 25....how in the world can you guys talk about Wilt, Dr. J , Jerry West, Bill Russel

Imagine your 8 year old brother telling you how awesome Kobe was 10 years from now:facepalm

I don't get it.

Real. I agree.


I wasn't saying that Duncan or Lebron were as good as Bird in clutch situations.

I'm saying that one could easily compile video evidence that you alluded to. Certainly with Lebron you could...dude has an insane amount of positive clutch moments so far in his career.

With Lebron it's not the lack of clutch moments...it's his horrible choking at critical times that hurts him. So if that was edited out like the other poster talked about...he absolutely could be made to look as clutch as Bird.

I can understand where you're coming from, but I think you're not seeing it through.

Think of all the interviews featured in these documentaries. Interviews of these players' contemporaries - opponents, teammates, coaches, opposing coaches, etc.

As far as clutch play is concerned, no one involved with LeBron's time in the NBA is going to speak of him the way they did about Bird.

His contemporaries may say things like "He was just everywhere on the court. I never saw another guy who could just be everywhere like that... shutting down our point guard, posting up our three and running their offense all night long. He was scoring for his team and doing everything else, getting key rebounds and even defending the rim. He was just incredible"...

or "His athleticism just put him on a level that's rare in this game - and he combined it with a basketball IQ and team-first mentality that made him as great as he was."

or even "A few times I saw him lock into this zone where he just looked invincible out there. I remember against Detroit that year, or against Boston in '12... man, he was always great, but every now and then he would just take over a game like nobody else could."

...

But NEVER would they say things like "That man was just stone cold. He could be down two - he'd look you right in your eye and say 'I'm gonna hit a three from the corner, in your face, to win this game' ... and then he would DO IT."

Or "Whenever the game was on the line, you just dreaded him. As soon as he got the ball, you felt like it was over for you. He always seemed to seal the deal when it mattered the most."

No one would talk about Lebron like that, because he just isn't like that whatsoever. In clutch moments, just like anyone, he sometimes succeeds and sometimes fails. But he doesn't seem to possess the capacity to strike fear in his opponents... at all. Even when he's hot. It's pretty baffling to watch sometimes, quite frankly, but it is what it is.

[tmacattack33]

Um, some people like basketball enough to revisit the older games during the summer?

I'm okay with it in all honesty, I'd much rather read a thread about older players than a Kobe/LeBron/Jordan thread.


unless it's a wilt thread.

Yeah, but the people who watch 5-10 classic games on youtube don't have context for what they are watching.

I can watch a regular season game next year between the 76ers and the Bulls and I know exactly what is going on...i know how good the Bulls are and their situation of collapsing this past year in the 2nd round and dealing with Butler/Rose tensions, Noah's injury, Pau Gasol getting up there in age but still playing surprisingly well. And how they still got whooped by a Cavs team with no K. Love and with Lebron having a terrible series.

I also know the 76ers current situation, with their ridiculously young roster and their unfortunate injury to Embiid after waiting all year for him to heal last year.

So i then know exactly how impressed I should be if the 76ers win...or how impressed i should be if Nerlens Noel holds Gasol to 11 pts and 6 rebounds. Etc. Etc.


Some kid watching this game on YouTube in 2044 would have no idea about these things. So even if he watches the whole game for some reason, he won't know exactly what he is watching.

[KayHaven]

Like someone stated ..20 years from now a documentary will be made to make LeBron look like a god. NBA TV will re-air his greatest games I.e. game 6 in Boston and others and some naive kid/teen or adult will see it and decide LeBron was totally tucking awesome a freak of nature and unstoppable...and he'll rank him accordingly..

But what about that series he lost to Orlando?
But what about that series he lost to the Mavs?
But what about him quitting against Boston?
What about him letting Deshawn Stevenson make him look like a fool?
What about him struggling to hit clutch shots?


Things like that will eventually get lost in the sauce....but will be vital in discussions about LeBron..

You guys are 20 years old talking about Larry bird...you guys really think you know everything there is to know about Larry to properly rank him..? Like seriously?

[KayHaven]

Yeah, but the people who watch 5-10 classic games on youtube don't have context for what they are watching.

I can watch a regular season game next year between the 76ers and the Bulls and I know exactly what is going on...i know how good the Bulls are and their situation of collapsing this past year in the 2nd round and dealing with Butler/Rose tensions, Noah's injury, Pau Gasol getting up there in age but still playing surprisingly well. And how they still got whooped by a Cavs team with no K. Love and with Lebron having a terrible series.

I also know the 76ers current situation, with their ridiculously young roster and their unfortunate injury to Embiid after waiting all year for him to heal last year.

So i then know exactly how impressed I should be if the 76ers win...or how impressed i should be if Nerlens Noel holds Gasol to 11 pts and 6 rebounds. Etc. Etc.


Some kid watching this game on YouTube in 2044 would have no idea about these things. So even if he watches the whole game for some reason, he won't know exactly what he is watching.

:applause:

Perfectly said....theres lots of context in sport and unless your there to take it all in and understand it you shouldn't feel comfortable speaking on it..

[superteamtheory]

Imagine your 8 year old brother telling you how awesome Kobe was 10 years from now

... my lil bro would be saying something true? :confusedshrug:

I mean, all it would take for him is to watch Kobe's career hilite reel and compare against NBA ball he's watched for 10-ish years... and that's even before he's had another 5-7 years to sleep on it / firm his opinion...

What I struggle with is there isn't enough footage available of, say, Dave Cowens... so, with a lot of these guys I have to use what I do see, plus read up and check stats, then use my imagination... and try to be fair / give benefit of the doubt...

I try my best to give credit to the old guys even tho I'm not a big believer in 60's & 70's (and some 80's) dominance (in other words, sure Wilt is top 10 all time but would he seriously average a 50 pt season today I don't think so)... then again, I'm also becoming less of a believer in the current future of the league...

[KayHaven]

... my lil bro would be saying something true? :confusedshrug:

I mean, all it would take for him is to watch Kobe's career hilite reel and compare against NBA ball he's watched for 10-ish years... and that's even before he's had another 5-7 years to sleep on it / firm his opinion...

What I struggle with is there isn't enough footage available of, say, Dave Cowens... so, with a lot of these guys I have to use what I do see, plus read up and check stats, then use my imagination... and try to be fair / give benefit of the doubt...

I try my best to give credit to the old guys even tho I'm not a big believer in 60's & 70's (and some 80's) dominance (in other words, sure Wilt is top 10 all time but would he seriously average a 50 pt season today I don't think so)... then again, I'm also becoming less of a believer in the current future of the league...

No that's where your wrong...comparing anybody off a highlight reel is wrong...

Harold minor has a highlight reel
Jeremy Lin has a highlight reel
There's a father somewhere in the world right now making a highlight reel for his son who averaged 12 pts a game last year..

Highlight reels are made to make people look good. That would be the last thing I look at to properly rank someone...

[superteamtheory]

Highlight reels are made to make people look good. That would be the last thing I look at to properly rank someone...

I think this best summarizes the spirit of haters right here..

[3ball]

I think this best summarizes the spirit of haters right here..
Well, we don't need highlights.. We have the eyetest, that confirms Lebron isn't clutch (compared to all-time greats).

But for those who want to be intellectually dishonest or in denial (ahem, superteamtheory), we have the ACTUAL STATS..

We KNOW what Lebron's clutch performance is because we can look up his 4th quarter playoff scoring... And here's a few gems:

Lebron 2011 Finals: 2.2
Lebron 2014 Finals: 3.6


OUCH

[ShawkFactory]

Well, we don't need highlights.. We have the eyetest, that confirms Lebron isn't clutch (compared to all-time greats).

But for those who want to be intellectually dishonest or in denial (ahem, superteamtheory), we have the ACTUAL STATS..

We KNOW what Lebron's clutch performance is because we can look up his 4th quarter playoff scoring... And here's a few gems:

Lebron 2011 Finals: 2.2
Lebron 2014 Finals: 3.6


OUCH
You added 2014? Where he missed most of one of the 4ths and 2 of the others were blowouts by then?

Not your best argument.

[TheMan]

Yeah, but the people who watch 5-10 classic games on youtube don't have context for what they are watching.

I can watch a regular season game next year between the 76ers and the Bulls and I know exactly what is going on...i know how good the Bulls are and their situation of collapsing this past year in the 2nd round and dealing with Butler/Rose tensions, Noah's injury, Pau Gasol getting up there in age but still playing surprisingly well. And how they still got whooped by a Cavs team with no K. Love and with Lebron having a terrible series.

I also know the 76ers current situation, with their ridiculously young roster and their unfortunate injury to Embiid after waiting all year for him to heal last year.

So i then know exactly how impressed I should be if the 76ers win...or how impressed i should be if Nerlens Noel holds Gasol to 11 pts and 6 rebounds. Etc. Etc.


Some kid watching this game on YouTube in 2044 would have no idea about these things. So even if he watches the whole game for some reason, he won't know exactly what he is watching.
:bowdown:

This is one of the best posts I've read here :applause:

[stalkerforlife]

I tend to put guys like Russell and Wilt near the bottom of my top 10 lists.

I'm 33.

I just don't know how good they were, but I respect the ones that paved the way.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

:bowdown:

This is one of the best posts I've read here :applause:

I gotta agree... rep thrown his way :applause:

While nothing beats watching the actual games at your leisure (youtube/internet/vhs), the context and privilege of seeing said games live, in the moment, is undoubtedly more important than reading stats, and drawing conclusions from basketball-reference.

[dreamwarrior]

I watched basketball from 89-92, some from 2000-2002, and 13-15. Going by accomplishments, Jordan was the best. Going by highlights, Kobe was the best. But as far as pure skills and ability on the court, the most talented player I have ever witnessed was Magic Johnson.

[KayHaven]

I watched basketball from 89-92, some from 2000-2002, and 13-15. Going by accomplishments, Jordan was the best. Going by highlights, Kobe was the best. But as far as pure skills and ability on the court, the most talented player I have ever witnessed was Magic Johnson.

Extremely interested in knowing why there's so many years you didn't watch basketball?

[kshutts1]

I gotta agree... rep thrown his way :applause:

While nothing beats watching the actual games at your leisure (youtube/internet/vhs), the context and privilege of seeing said games live, in the moment, is undoubtedly more important than reading stats, and drawing conclusions from basketball-reference.
His post was awesome for showing how important context would be, but one major counter-argument I would have about seeing games "in the moment" is that we, as humans with feeling, have a great tendency to get caught up in the moment.

Statistics are more logic/fact based, (huge caveat) assuming we look at a very wide range of statistics.

Both "in the moment" and stats can be misleading. Best way is to do both. But most people tend to not pore over statistics that they saw "in the moment" (or they discredit them because said stats don't match up with the eye test), while they do tend to pore over stats from games they did not watch.

Not exactly a catch-22, but pretty close.

[sdot_thadon]

His post was awesome for showing how important context would be, but one major counter-argument I would have about seeing games "in the moment" is that we, as humans with feeling, have a great tendency to get caught up in the moment.

Statistics are more logic/fact based, (huge caveat) assuming we look at a very wide range of statistics.

Both "in the moment" and stats can be misleading. Best way is to do both. But most people tend to not pore over statistics that they saw "in the moment" (or they discredit them because said stats don't match up with the eye test), while they do tend to pore over stats from games they did not watch.

Not exactly a catch-22, but pretty close.
It was a great post, also to add a layer to it the way we perceive the current league is vastly different for the same reason. We have every detail and the totality of context in the moment so we can criticize in depth. We don't have that for the past as a whole. So we judge the past from an incomplete puzzle.

[kshutts1]

It was a great post, also to add a layer to it the way we perceive the current league is vastly different for the same reason. We have every detail and the totality of context in the moment so we can criticize in depth. We don't have that for the past as a whole. So we judge the past from an incomplete puzzle.
Agreed.

Though I would also argue that most "fans" judge current league from an incomplete puzzle. Just going back to the "if I saw it, why do I need to research it?" line of thinking.

[sdot_thadon]

Agreed.

Though I would also argue that most "fans" judge current league from an incomplete puzzle. Just going back to the "if I saw it, why do I need to research it?" line of thinking.
Yeah I got ya, but we have the full context fresh and available. Some of these guys purposely ignore things. I'd like to see more guys doing their homework before talking about older players though. There are some gross offenders running around here. I myself started a while back attempting to fit older players into today's logic and see if I can answer the same questions or spot similar criticisms.