Top 25 Centers of All-Time Voting Part 1: Players 1-5

[L.Kizzle]

Select and rank your 5 greatest CENTERS of All-Time with #1 obviously being the greatest.
48 Hour window of voting. After 48 hours, 5 will be selected (based on ranking) and another 5 will be added to the pool.

Let the games begin and lets have some fun.

Players to choose from:
Bill Russell
Bill Walton
Bob McAdoo
Dave Cowens
David Robinson
George Mikan
Hakeem Olajuwon
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
Moses Malone
Patrick Ewing
Robert Parish
Shaquille O’Neal
Wes Unseld
Willis Reed
Wilt Chamberlain

[SouBeachTalents]

1. Kareem
2, Wilt
3. Russell
4. Shaq
5. Hakeem

[NBAGOAT]

1. Kareem
2. Russell
3. Wilt
4. Shaq
5. Hakeem

If you need some explanation, i'll edit them in

[Ainosterhaspie]

1. Kareem
2. Russell
3. Wilt
4. Shaq
5. Hakeem

[L.Kizzle]

1. Kareem

2. Russell

3. Wilt

4. Shaq

5. Hakeem

If you need some explanation, i'll edit them in
You can add a little blurb to them if you want. But unless you had some outlandish guy at #1 like Wes Unseld, (RIP) that would need an explanation if you felt strongly about him being #1.

[NBAGOAT]

You can add a little blurb to them if you want. But unless you had some outlandish guy at #1 like Wes Unseld, (RIP) that would need an explanation if you felt strongly about him being #1.

alright i'll only add something in if i go something pretty far from the consensus. as i said earlier however, this will be really tough once we get to the 20 range

[1987_Lakers]

1. Kareem
2. Russell
3. Shaq
4. Wilt
5. Hakeem

[Lebron23]

1. Kareem
2. Russell
3. Shaq
4. Wilt
5. Hakeem

This

[L.Kizzle]

So far, the consensus # 1 pick is Kareem.
Will any other players sneak into the # 5 slot?
3 time MVP and NBA Champ Moses Malone?
the first dominant big man, George Mikan?

[r0drig0lac]

1. Kareem
2. Russell
3. Wilt
4. Shaq
5. Hakeem

[RoundMoundOfReb]

1. Kareem
2. Russell
3. Shaq
4. Hakeem
5. Wilt

[RoundMoundOfReb]

So far, the consensus # 1 pick is Kareem.
Will any other players sneak into the # 5 slot?
3 time MVP and NBA Champ Moses Malone?
the first dominant big man, George Mikan?

I think the top 5 is what it is. #1 between Russell and Kareem and #4 between Hakeem and Wilt are really tough for me. Ultimately, broke the tie for the player I just feel is more portable from team to team, era to era.

[And1AllDay]

1. Kareem
2. Shaq
3. Russell
4. Wilt
5. Hakeem

[Lebron_James]

1. Kareem
2, Shaq
3. Wilt
4. Russell
5. Moses Malone

[L.Kizzle]

1. Kareem
2, Shaq
3. Wilt
4. Russell
5. Moses Malone
What's your reasoning on Moses over Hakeem?
I really don't think it's far fetched myself.

[Lebron_James]

What's your reasoning on Moses over Hakeem?
I really don't think it's far fetched myself.

3 NBA MVP is pretty big number. Also dominated the league statistically.

[Taurus]

1. Kareem
2. Russell
3. Shaq
4. Wilt
5. Hakeem

[kkb_12]

1) Shaq
2) Russel
3) Kareem
4) Hakeem
5) Wilt

[Phoenix]

Kareem
Russell
Shaq
Wilt
Hakeem

Honestly, I think if I was asked to rank Shaq and Wilt 5 times my answer would be different each time.

[HBK_Kliq_2]

1) Shaq
2) Wilt
3) Kareem
4) Russell
5) Hakeem

[jalbert009]

1. Kareem
2. Russell
3. Wilt
4. Shaq
5. Hakeem

If you need some explanation, i'll edit them in

I vote the same as this guy

[AussieSteve]

1. Kareem
2. Russell
3. Wilt
4. Hakeem
5. Shaq

Hakeem and Shaq are interchangeable really, but I rate Hakeem higher for two reasons. 1) Shaq only won with ATG level SGs, while Hakeem won as a lone superstar, and 2) Hakeem dominated Shaq in the finals. Shaq was young I know, so this isn't a clincher but it's a factor for me. Not to diminish Shaq, I just think that prime Hakeem would likely have won Shaq's rings but I'm not so sure about prime Shaq winning both of Hakeem's.

[Phoenix]

1. Kareem
2. Russell
3. Wilt
4. Hakeem
5. Shaq

Hakeem and Shaq are interchangeable really, but I rate Hakeem higher for two reasons. 1) Shaq only won with ATG level SGs, while Hakeem won as a lone superstar, and 2) Hakeem dominated Shaq in the finals. Shaq was young I know, so this isn't a clincher but it's a factor for me. Not to diminish Shaq, I just think that prime Hakeem would likely have won Shaq's rings but I'm not so sure about prime Shaq winning both of Hakeem's.

Hakeem outplayed Shaq ( young Shaq as you pointed out) but I don't think he dominated him. Shaq at 28/12 on 60% shooting more than held his ground to Hakeems 33/11( on 49% shooting). To the point where I think the role players were the ones who determined the outcome way more than the difference between Hakeem and Shaq.

I think peak Shaq wins in 95 with Drexler as his second option, remembering that Kobe was very good in 2000 but didn't ascend to true superstardom till the 01 season. Shaq and Clyde with all the shooters around Shaq (Horry, Jet, Elie), Cassell etc? That's a championship core to me. I mean who beats that team in 95? If Shaq is on the Rockets then who is Hakeem playing for? Would Hakeem be with the Magic, like a straight swap?

Shaq may not have won in 94 though, and for the reason that he did need a star/superstar wing as his running mate and the 94 team didn't have that. So the available evidence points to no in 94, and likely in 95. I do in general think its splitting hairs between these guys though. The center position accounts for half of the top 10 players ever. Shaq is dominating the 60s and 70s. Put Hakeem on the 60s Rockets, I dont know if hes winning 11, but hes winning alot. Russell ain't winning 11 titles in the 80s and 90s. Era, teammates and timing matters alot in these situations.

[aceman]

6. Moses
7. Robinson
8. Cowans
9. Ewing
10. Mikan

[Manny98]

1. Kareem2. Shaq3. Russell4. Wilt5. Hakeem

[Psileas]

1. Wilt
2. Kareem
3. Russell (almost interchangable with Kareem)
4. Shaq
5. Hakeem

[Turbo Slayer]

1. Kareem

2. Russell

3. Shaq

4. Hakeem

5. Wilt

[ArbitraryWater]

1. Kareem
2. Wilt
3. Shaq
4. Russell
5. Hakeem

But I really don't feel strongly about 2-5 at all, could be any order

[Round Mound]

1-Wilt
2-Kareem
3-Hakeem
4-Shaq
5-Russell

[Carbine]

1 - Russell
2 - Kareem
3 - Shaq
4 - Wilt
5 - Hakeem

[Roundball_Rock]

1) Kareem
2) Wilt
3) Russell
4) Shaq
5) Hakeem

These are clearly the consensus top 5 in some order. Moses and Robinson probably are a tier of their own behind them and ahead of the next group.

[Carbine]

I'm willing for someone to convince me Kareem is #1 over Bill.

Those people voting for him must place a lot on longevity. Are these people also voting for LeBron over MJ as GOAT?

It can't be titles.

Accolades would be in Russell's favor too if they had FMVP, DPOY back then. One award is named after him, the other could be as well.

Era? Kareems 70's era was probably the weak point in NBA history, no?

Eye test? I could buy that, not going to argue against it.

[Roundball_Rock]

*KAJ was the best player in the NBA for a decade. Only LeBron has rivaled that run.
*KAJ's longevity blows away that of any top 15 ATG, other than LeBron.
*Accolades are debatable. Kareem has the record for MVP's--not Russell, MJ, or LeBron. Kareem has more all-NBA. Etc. FMVP is a team based result. Put KAJ on the Celtics and Russell on teams with 0 all-NBA players from for nearly his entire prime (like KAJ did--Oscar 71' was his only prime all-NBA teammate) and what happens?
*Kareem had no flaw in his game. Russell did: scoring.
*Kareem's edge on offense more than trumps Russell's edge on defense.
*KAJ could be relied on in the clutch on both ends.
*As far as era, KAJ dominated in two eras. KAJ in the 80's had a top 30 all-time type career--and this is KAJ from age 33 into his 40's that we are talking about. Prime KAJ would be the best player in the 80's, as we saw in 80', his last prime year. KAJ is immune to any legit era-based attack because he dominated in two, with players who were elite in the
60's and 90's. He was judged against stars from four eras.
*KAJ had the most unstoppable shot in history.

If you are drafting teams from scratch, KAJ is the better franchise cornerstone because you can put any type of team around him. With Russell you would require another elite scorer to offset his lack of scoring. KAJ brings offense, scoring, and even playmaking in one package.

Basically your entire post could apply to Russell vs. MJ--but we rarely if ever hear that. Jordan is deemed far ahead of MJ.

Russell and Wilt have legit cases, though. I won't dispute that but I have KAJ #1 for the reasons stated above.

[AussieSteve]

I'm willing for someone to convince me Kareem is #1 over Bill.

Those people voting for him must place a lot on longevity. Are these people also voting for LeBron over MJ as GOAT?

It can't be titles.

Accolades would be in Russell's favor too if they had FMVP, DPOY back then. One award is named after him, the other could be as well.

Era? Kareems 70's era was probably the weak point in NBA history, no?

Eye test? I could buy that, not going to argue against it.

Both were before my time so I lean on what I've read and seen.

A big part of me thinks Kareem is over rated a tad. He won just the 1 ring prior to magic joining him at age 32. To me that's far from a GOAT standard. But plenty of old heads have him as the GOAT, so I accept I'm probably lacking some knowledge.

I also think that the only reason we now rate rings so highly is because of the Jordan apologists. I prefer to rank players based on level of play rather than ring count. A player's help, competition, luck, injuries etc. are all out of their control and can impact how many rings they win.

[Roundball_Rock]

Both were before my time so I lean on what I've read and seen.

A big part of me thinks Kareem is over rated a tad. He won just the 1 ring prior to magic joining him at age 32. To me that's far from a GOAT standard. But plenty of old heads have him as the GOAT, so I accept I'm probably lacking some knowledge.

I also think that the only reason we now rate rings so highly is because of the Jordan apologists. I prefer to rank players based on level of play rather than ring count. A player's help, competition, luck, injuries etc. are all out of their control and can impact how many rings they win.

Back when Kareem played Oscar was a GOAT candidate with 1 (sidekick) ring. Different times. The turning point was KAJ demanded a trade early because he wanted the Bucks to get value back for him. If he did what LeBron or KD did and left a year later in free agency he would have went to a much better team. Instead LA gutted itself to acquire him. That is a factor in the team's lack of relative success. If KAJ was in this era, he would simply have waited a year and had better teams for the second half of his prime.

Moreover, KAJ's teams had bad injury luck with #2 and #3 options. Would MJ have won if Pippen or Rodman missed the entire playoffs or key series?

Additionally, KAJ's played against teams with 4-5 HOF like the Wilt/West Lakers or the Havlicek/Cowens Celtics (the other team had more HOF--opposite with MJ). He wasn't up the Ewing/Starks or Miller/Smits teams of the 90's that MJ got to face.

Finally, KAJ had poor timing. He got Oscar when Oscar was old; he got Magic when KAJ was old. The primes of these players never overlapped. Jordan got all of Pippen's prime, LeBron got part of Wade's, LeBron played with prime Irving, prime AD, etc.

People underrate what KAJ's teams did in the 70's. 1 chip, 2 finals, 5 conference finals. That isn't nothing. People seem to think they his teams were also rans outside of 72'.


I also think that the only reason we now rate rings so highly is because of the Jordan apologists. I prefer to rank players based on level of play rather than ring count. A player's help, competition, luck, injuries etc. are all out of their control and can impact how many rings they win.

Exactly. Put KAJ on the 60's Celtics and 90's Bulls and what changes? The Bulls with KAJ probably win an additional chip because KAJ wouldn't randomly retire in the middle of the run like MJ did.

The ring stuff was reverse engineered, like some other stuff, to suit MJ's resume (they simply ignore Russell). If LeBron gets to 6 watch the goal posts shift. :oldlol:

[Kiddlovesnets]

1. Kareem
2. Russell
3. Wilt
4. Shaq
5. Hakeem

[AussieSteve]

1. Kareem
2, Shaq
3. Wilt
4. Russell
5. Moses Malone

Cant put Moses over Hakeem.

He won only one ring in a 20 year career and to get it he needed the following players, all in their primes... Dr J, Mo Cheeks, Andrew Toney, Bobby Jones.

Three HoFers, and a fourth (Toney) who would probably have been also if not for injury ruining his career at age 27.

Literally HoF level players in their primes at all 5 positions!!

[Horatio33]

Kareem
Russell
Shaq
Hakeem
Wilt

[L.Kizzle]

Cant put Moses over Hakeem.

He won only one ring in a 20 year career and to get it he needed the following players, all in their primes... Dr J, Mo Cheeks, Andrew Toney, Bobby Jones.

Three HoFers, and a fourth (Toney) who would probably have been also if not for injury ruining his career at age 27.

Literally HoF level players in their primes at all 5 positions!!

If that's the case, you can't put Kareem (Lakers had HoF'ers at every position as well) that high as well.
But Moses has 2 more MVPs and took a Rockets team to the NBA Finals vs a team full of HoF'ers in Boston.

Moses has a case for at the least a #5 shot. It could be argued.

[Carbine]

*KAJ was the best player in the NBA for a decade. Only LeBron has rivaled that run.
*KAJ's longevity blows away that of any top 15 ATG, other than LeBron.
*Accolades are debatable. Kareem has the record for MVP's--not Russell, MJ, or LeBron. Kareem has more all-NBA. Etc. FMVP is a team based result. Put KAJ on the Celtics and Russell on teams with 0 all-NBA players from for nearly his entire prime (like KAJ did--Oscar 71' was his only prime all-NBA teammate) and what happens?
*Kareem had no flaw in his game. Russell did: scoring.
*Kareem's edge on offense more than trumps Russell's edge on defense.
*KAJ could be relied on in the clutch on both ends.
*As far as era, KAJ dominated in two eras. KAJ in the 80's had a top 30 all-time type career--and this is KAJ from age 33 into his 40's that we are talking about. Prime KAJ would be the best player in the 80's, as we saw in 80', his last prime year. KAJ is immune to any legit era-based attack because he dominated in two, with players who were elite in the
60's and 90's. He was judged against stars from four eras.
*KAJ had the most unstoppable shot in history.

If you are drafting teams from scratch, KAJ is the better franchise cornerstone because you can put any type of team around him. With Russell you would require another elite scorer to offset his lack of scoring. KAJ brings offense, scoring, and even playmaking in one package.

Basically your entire post could apply to Russell vs. MJ--but we rarely if ever hear that. Jordan is deemed far ahead of MJ.

Russell and Wilt have legit cases, though. I won't dispute that but I have KAJ #1 for the reasons stated above.

I don't doubt Kareems ability in any era, but it is worth pointing out that Kareems competition for those MVPs were not very strong. Go take a look at the first team All-NBA team from those 70's MVP winning years - it's poor relatively speaking to what you'd expect. Actually lets call it for what it was - the worst era for elite baskeball players. Russell was winning 5 MVPs against another top tier legend at his own position in Wilts prime.

It's interesting to me that Russell won 3 MVPS as the 2nd team All-NBA center. What's going on there? Is it like when Brees won OPOY over Manning who won MVP in same year? Just give the all-nba nod to the best stats?

[GP_20]

1) Russell
2) Wilt
3) Kareem
4) Shaq
5) Hakeem

I don't get Kareem over Russell either and don't really get Kareem over Wilt. Wilt at age 36 was holding his own against Kareem

[Carbine]

*KAJ was the best player in the NBA for a decade. Only LeBron has rivaled that run.
*KAJ's longevity blows away that of any top 15 ATG, other than LeBron.
*Accolades are debatable. Kareem has the record for MVP's--not Russell, MJ, or LeBron. Kareem has more all-NBA. Etc. FMVP is a team based result. Put KAJ on the Celtics and Russell on teams with 0 all-NBA players from for nearly his entire prime (like KAJ did--Oscar 71' was his only prime all-NBA teammate) and what happens?
*Kareem had no flaw in his game. Russell did: scoring.
*Kareem's edge on offense more than trumps Russell's edge on defense.
*KAJ could be relied on in the clutch on both ends.
*As far as era, KAJ dominated in two eras. KAJ in the 80's had a top 30 all-time type career--and this is KAJ from age 33 into his 40's that we are talking about. Prime KAJ would be the best player in the 80's, as we saw in 80', his last prime year. KAJ is immune to any legit era-based attack because he dominated in two, with players who were elite in the
60's and 90's. He was judged against stars from four eras.
*KAJ had the most unstoppable shot in history.

If you are drafting teams from scratch, KAJ is the better franchise cornerstone because you can put any type of team around him. With Russell you would require another elite scorer to offset his lack of scoring. KAJ brings offense, scoring, and even playmaking in one package.

Basically your entire post could apply to Russell vs. MJ--but we rarely if ever hear that. Jordan is deemed far ahead of MJ.

Russell and Wilt have legit cases, though. I won't dispute that but I have KAJ #1 for the reasons stated above.

Wanted to address this as well. This is a hard stance to take, considering he won 11 titles without an elite scorer. Bill Sharman, Heinson were his top scorers most of the time right? Not exactly Jerry West.

We just saw Butler get to a final averaging I believe under 20 pts up until the finals series. They had no elite scorer.

Mid 2010 Spurs didn't have an elite scorer around Duncan.

Pistons of the mid 00's didn't have an elite scorer around Wallace. Kidd made back to back finals without an elite scorer next to him.

We need to give Bill his damn respect it seems.

[TheCorporation]

1. Kareem
2. Russell
3. Shaq
4. Wilt
5. Hakeem

[TheCorporation]

1) Russell
2) Wilt
3) Kareem
4) Shaq
5) Hakeem

I don't get Kareem over Russell either and don't really get Kareem over Wilt. Wilt at age 36 was holding his own against Kareem

Where do you rank MJ, Bron and Russell then?

[Gougou]

Kareem
Wilt
Bill Russell
Shaq (Laker Shaq was a beast)
Hakeem

[Roundball_Rock]

Wanted to address this as well. This is a hard stance to take, considering he won 11 titles without an elite scorer. Bill Sharman, Heinson were his top scorers most of the time right? Not exactly Jerry West. .

You just listed four top 10 scorers he played with, two which were top 5 (top 10 meaning they peaked at top 10 in the league, top 5 the same concept. I am talking individual seasons, not top 10 for the entire era). That confirms the point. If you are "drafting" a random team around Russell, what are the odds you get that type of scoring firepower?


We just saw Butler get to a final averaging I believe under 20 pts up until the finals series. They had no elite scorer.

Butler's peak is 24 PPG on a team that scored 103 PPG; Russell's is 19 PPG on a team that scored 121 PPG.

He is Bill Russell, a GOAT candidate. He was the GOAT defender and a strong playmaker despite being a C. Of course you could make the finals and even win with him. That doesn't negate he has an obvious flaw that team construction would have to account for. KAJ has no weakness in his game. Are you saying if a team drafted Bill Russell they would simply select the 11 best players available--not skew their next picks towards scorers to get guys like Heihnson, Havlicek, Jones, Sharman, etc.?


We need to give Bill his damn respect it seems.

Saying he is 5th all-time and 3rd at C is disrespectful? :confusedshrug:


I don't doubt Kareems ability in any era, but it is worth pointing out that Kareems competition for those MVPs were not very strong. Go take a look at the first team All-NBA team from those 70's MVP winning years - it's poor relatively speaking to what you'd expect.

Wilt didn't make the first team because KAJ locked that spot down but Wilt was a MVP candidate to the very end (3rd or 4th in MVP). Then you have West, a borderline top 10 player, Barry (top 20 AT), Havlicek (top 20-25), Cowens (a 2x MVP), Reed, Frazier, Hayes, McAdoo, Walton, Dr. J, Moses, Magic, and Bird all in the NBA during his prime. That isn't as impressive as what Wilt faced for MVP's but certainly compares to MJ's or LeBron's. Neither of them faced a GOAT candidate as a MVP competitor either.


Russell was winning 5 MVPs against another top tier legend at his own position in Wilts prime.

True--but the same logic applies to Wilt (who won 4 MVP's in the same era against Russell) who faced another GOAT candidate for MVP's (not to mention Oscar, West two borderline top 10 types plus Baylor who is top 15) but whenever MJ comes up no one points this out about Wilt/Russell (except me :oldlol: ). There can't be one criteria for KAJ, another for MJ.


It's interesting to me that Russell won 3 MVPS as the 2nd team All-NBA center. What's going on there?

Different voters--players versus the media.

It should be noted KAJ won all of his MVP's when players made the choice. The change was made in 1981.

[Carbine]

How could I list four when I listed two?

You said he requires an elite scorer next to him.

Requires means he needs it, otherwise he can't win titles. That's how I took it.

He doesn't require an elite scorer next to him. He requires a good team just like anyone else, but that team could have two good scorers like a 2020 post season Dragic for example.

[Carbine]

Kareems direct competition for his first MVP was 32 year old West.

Being 32 back then was like being 37 these days. Third was Bing.... I doubt 20 percent of this board know who he is without googling it.

His next MVP was an even older West and third place was a 35 year old Wilt. He's going against twilight year legends as his competition for these awards.

His next one was McAdoo and Cowens. Surely excellent players but I have my doubts any of them make people's top 25 AT.

He won them when the best players from the previous era were old and the new crop of players were not too heavy on the ATG scale. His 80 one was the strongest of them all IMO without question.

He holds the record so you can't take it away, he would be winning a lot of MVPs regardless of era and players in the league at the time. But when we are talking the difference of 1 MVP you have to take into account one played in an extremely tough era winning 5 and another played in a relative weak one to win the majority of his.

[Dbrog]

1. Russell
2. Kareem
3. Wilt
4. Shaq
5. Hakeem

[Roundball_Rock]

How could I list four when I listed two?


My bad. :oldlol:


You said he requires an elite scorer next to him.

Requires means he needs it, otherwise he can't win titles. That's how I took it.


Got it. I believe the way I phrased it was the team construction would require it. You always want to maximize your championship window. To do that with Russell, you need some scoring punch. If I am a GM and Russell is my first pick in a hypothetical all-time draft I am looking for scoring in the 2nd or 3rd round. Wouldn't you?

With KAJ I would have more freedom to just take the best players available.


His next MVP was an even older West and third place was a 35 year old Wilt. He's going against twilight year legends as his competition for these awards.

True--but that cuts the other direction too. KAJ had 3rd, 4th, 4th, and 5th place MVP finishes after 80'. The last (5th) came in 86' when he was 38. Why would we think prime KAJ wouldn't win a bunch of MVP's in the 80's too? Bird was the dominant MVP candidate of the decade--a clearly lesser player than KAJ.

I agree tougher comp means less MVP's but the same could be said about MJ and LeBron too. They didn't have to go against Russell/Wilt, Oscar, West, Baylor not to mention others like Petit, Barry, Cousy like Russell/Wilt did.

The 2nd/3rd place guys when MJ/KAJ/LeBron won MVP were:

KAJ: West/Bing, West/Wilt, McAdoo/Lanier, McAdoo/Cowens, Walton/Marvich, Erving/Gervin.
MJ: Bird/Magic, Magic/Robinson, Drexler/Robinson, Robinson/Penny, Malone/Payton
LeBron: Kobe/Wade, Durant/Kobe, Durant/Paul, Durant/Carmelo.

Is there a material difference here?


He holds the record so you can't take it away, he would be winning a lot of MVPs regardless of era and players in the league at the time. But when we are talking the difference of 1 MVP you have to take into account one played in an extremely tough era winning 5 and another played in a relative weak one to win the majority of his.

Generally true--but with one caveat: voter fatigue. How many MVP's did KAJ, MJ, and LeBron lose due to voter fatigue? Maybe if he is playing against tougher MVP comp he wins less back-to-back but wins another MVP or two in a year he actually lost it due to voter fatigue.

[Carbine]

I don't know if there is voter fatigue when the players are the ones voting on it. I know voter fatigue is a thing for the media, but I have my doubts for players having it back then.

I do think there is a difference in MVP voting especially for LeBron. Some may disagree but I put Durant as a top 12 player of all time and Kobe is universally top 12 and majority give him top 10 ATG status. That's pretty stiff competition.

MJs is right there. Bird and Magic are universally top 10 ATG, some would say top 5. Malone is universally top 20, slightly higher than McAdoo and Robinson would be a top 15 ATG with more post season success. He's a unique case because Robinson probably was a top 15 Regular season player ever. His playoff resume means nothing in an award based on regular season play. Robinson might actually be a top 12 ATG regular season player.

LeBrons comp was the stiffest, which is probably why he only has four. Giannis is a lot like Robinson currently, an absolute monster in the regular season but lacking the playoff success.

So yes, I do think there is a decent gap in competition for regular season MVPs.

[Roundball_Rock]

I suspect there was voter fatigue. Were Cowens or McAdoo or Walton legitimately better than prime KAJ?



I do think there is a difference in MVP voting especially for LeBron. Some may disagree but I put Durant as a top 12 player of all time and Kobe is universally top 12 and majority give him top 10 ATG status. That's pretty stiff competition.

MJs is right there. Bird and Magic are universally top 10 ATG, some would say top 5. Malone is universally top 20, slightly higher than McAdoo and Robinson would be a top 15 ATG with more post season success. He's a unique case because Robinson probably was a top 15 Regular season player ever. His playoff resume means nothing in an award based on regular season play. Robinson might actually be a top 12 ATG regular season player.

You could say the same things for KAJ. Wilt is a GOAT candidate. He was past his prime but still a MVP candidate. West is borderline top 10, Havlicek would be top 20 if it weren't for era bias, then you get to Moses a top 15 players, Dr. J who is top 15-20 later in the 70's and then Bird at the tail end of Kareem's prime. You point to ages but you can do the same with Bird. He was 31 when MJ won his first MVP and 34 when MJ won his second. With LeBron, the same with Kobe. 30 for LeBron's first, 34 when LeBron won his third (first in Miami).

Wilt/Russell are the only cases of two GOAT candidates whose primes overlapped for an extended period. Bird/Magic overlapped as well but neither are quite GOAT candidates.

MJ's biggest perennial comp was Robinson, for LeBron it was Durant. We can bring Magic or Kobe up but it was usually Robinson or KD, not those guys.


LeBrons comp was the stiffest, which is probably why he only has four.

The media also seems to find a different rationale to have him finish 2nd. Basically for LeBron to actually win his team has to have the best record in the NBA (12' being the only exception).


So yes, I do think there is a decent gap in competition for regular season MVPs.

I can see that. It is a based on interpretation. I don't see a meaningful gap but can see why people would agree with your reasoning.

Agree on the Giannis/Robinson comp.

[Kblaze8855]

The Kareem and Russell argument to me is one I can’t even make as far as bringing one of them down to prop up the other. You just praise both and see which list of godly feats looks better. You could argue they are the two best players ever or top 3 with MJ in whatever order depending on what you wanted to lean on.

Ita a battle of greatest positives. Even going negative makes you almost seem disrespectful.

[GP_20]

My bad. :oldlol:



Got it. I believe the way I phrased it was the team construction would require it. You always want to maximize your championship window. To do that with Russell, you need some scoring punch. If I am a GM and Russell is my first pick in a hypothetical all-time draft I am looking for scoring in the 2nd or 3rd round. Wouldn't you?


Wait who were Bill Russell's leading scorers in 1969? He had only 1 20+ppg scorer and he ranked 16th overall in the NBA. And considering there were less players in the NBA during that time, that 16th isn't as impressive as being 16th today.

Furthermore, many years (if not most) of Bill Russell's career his teams have been on the bottom offensively. Yet they still won. Bill Russell was able to win on teams that were top in the league in scoring high offensive motored teams, and he was also able to win in teams that were bottom in the league in scoring. He actually showed he could win if you surrouded him with the best offensive players in the league (Cousy, Sharman) or the best defenders (KC Jones, Sanders).