Before you die 5 new people will enter the top 10. Top five centers? May not change.

[Kblaze8855]

How ****ing hard is it to crack this list?

https://www.hostpic.org/images/2212131952010335.jpeg





That’s been the list for 20 years. In that time Kobe, Lebron, Duncan, and Steph have all either cemented top 10 or at least been heavily involved in the conversation.

It doesn’t feel too impossible for anyone to take a spot in the “To be considered” ranks. Giannis might do it. KD is already there to actual basketball people. Leonard fans had started breathing heavily as he knocked on the door before he was never heard from again.

But that centers list?

When Moses with 3 mvps and a ring isn’t there? When Reed with an mvp and 2 finals mvps isn’t even an honorable mention? When Cowens is utterly ignored with 2 rings and an mvp. When David Robinson went from winning gm polls over Jordan for player they most wanted to being DPOY/mvp/scoring champ and has rings? And still can’t get a mention on that list? Mikan has 5ish rings(ish because some were not technically nba). Can’t make the list.

Are we gonna die with the same “consensus” top 5 centers due to a combo of outside in ball and everyone over 6’10” wanting to be KD?


Jokic wins another mvp and a ring…he’s “just” Moses. Embiid finally gets his mvp this year…and wins 2 rings both with finals mvp? He’s Reed.

Anyone else even on the horizon?

Can we just retire top 5 discussion for that position?

It feels like all dissent will just be contrarians fighting the tide with “Yea but….Jokic is technically better than _____” arguments like David Robinson fans made 25 years ago.

Public perception wise?

I think it’s over.

We are more likely to get 3-5 new top 10 players than 1 new top 5 center. Right?

[Axe]

Russell and kareem are interchangeable, i believe. They'll be sitting at the top but it all boils down on how specific the criteria is. Tho it certainly would have been a big boost on russell's resume had the finals mvp award already existed during his reign.

[FultzNationRISE]

All depends on the media, really.

The media supply lists and narratives, and we imbibe and repeat them. The graphic you showed reflects how a typical ESPN pundit or Bleacher Report contributor sees it - which is not to say it's wrong, there is no wrong, it's subjective - and therefore that's what most people will conform to.

There are kids in the NBA right now who werent even alive when MJ played. These kids get asked who their all-time top 5 is, and they simply give the names they think will make it sound like they have a clue. They base this on what they've heard already in the media. It's the same thing the rest of us do when it comes to guys like Russell and Wilt. Save for maybe a few rare fans who've really analyzed the available footage, most of us use popular opinion as a guide and then just add our own wrinkles. We really have no clue what we're talking about when it comes to guys who played before we were fans.

So whatever people in the media want the Top 5 centers to be... that's what the Top 5 centers will be.

[Kblaze8855]

I’m not 100% sure I’ve ever seen a top 5 all time centers list. Maybe I saw Shaq get mocked in one on tnt that left him off. But it’s not really a discussion people have. Maybe because there isn’t one to have.

Mikan and Moses are the only ones to talk about and nobody cares they existed.

[John8204]

George Mikan has 7 (ish) rings not 5, the NBA counts the BAA not the NBL for titles in 47/48 but Mikan's Lakers moved over in 49 and won in the NBL in 47/48. The Lakers won the title while the other champions(Warriors/Bullets) didn't even make the finals it's pretty obvious that The Lakers were the best team of that era.

So on that list I would go
1. Wilt
2. KAJ
3. Bill
4. Hakeem
5. Shaq

But my top five are
1. Wilt
2. KAJ
3. Bill
4. Mikan
5. Moses

As for centers cracking the top five..Jokic to me can crack top ten but to me he's on the same level as Nate Thurmond, Patrick Ewing, and Willis Reed fringe top ten. For me Shaq, Hakeem, and Robinson are all neck and neck

[Kblaze8855]

The Lakers won the title while the other champions(Warriors/Bullets) didn't even make the finals it's pretty obvious that The Lakers were the best team of that era..


The globetrotters beat the lakers with a 30 foot game winner when they were the champs. Mikan had 24 I think. And that game was dead serious:


https://thumbs.gfycat.com/WhisperedLightCaracal-size_restricted.gif





The lakers wanted a rematch a year later and guess what?


The Globetrotters won again.


However….once the nba was desegregated? The lakers beat them 6 times in a row.

In Mikans prime? It’s entirely possible the Harlem Globetrotters were the best basketball team in the world.

[John8204]

Mikan and Moses are the only ones to talk about and nobody cares they existed.

Which is the key point, Shaq is popular so he gets put on these lists but facts and reality Moses and Mikan were better. It's very strange to me how people always write Mikan off when he's probably the most important player in NBA history. As he was the first star but his game defined what the NBA became and he was the main ambassador for the league.

Moses on the other hand played just like Shaq except he played defense and he didn't try and team hop to the MVP's in the league to get cheap rings.

[Kblaze8855]

Which is the key point, Shaq is popular so he gets put on these lists but facts and reality Moses and Mikan were better. It's very strange to me how people always write Mikan off when he's probably the most important player in NBA history. As he was the first star but his game defined what the NBA became and he was the main ambassador for the league.

Moses on the other hand played just like Shaq except he played defense and he didn't try and team hop to the MVP's in the league to get cheap rings.


Moses literally hopped to the team of the previous mvp(before him). It’s only remembered as a trade because before 1988 free agent decisions required compensation or the league would send it to arbitration to decide.

Moses to Philly was absolutely a ring chasing in your prime situation.

[SouBeachTalents]

Which is the key point, Shaq is popular so he gets put on these lists but facts and reality Moses and Mikan were better. It's very strange to me how people always write Mikan off when he's probably the most important player in NBA history. As he was the first star but his game defined what the NBA became and he was the main ambassador for the league.

Moses on the other hand played just like Shaq except he played defense and he didn't try and team hop to the MVP's in the league to get cheap rings.
:roll: Absolutely clueless

[John8204]

Moses literally hopped to the team of the previous mvp(before him). It’s only remembered as a trade because before 1988 free agent decisions required compensation or the league would send it to arbitration to decide.

Moses to Philly was absolutely a ring chasing in your prime situation.

The Rockets chose not to match the contract, Dr J was 31 and let's be real here he could have joined a bunch of dynasties during his run from Boston to Los Angeles, to Detroit...he could have hitched his wagon to Jordan. It's not nearly the same thing as Shaq running to Wade, Nash, Lebron, and KG

[Yeezy]

if i'm doing a draft it goes

1. hakeem
2. shaq
3. wilt
4. kareem
5. moses

if its based on accomplishments then its

1. Russell
2. Kareem
3. Mikan
4. shaq
5. Wilt

if its based on status then

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

[Kblaze8855]

Houston had the money and Moses wanted to go to Philly. Here he is saying so himself:


'I think coming here will make me a better ballplayer because people won't be looking at me to do everything,'

'It's the Doc's show and I'm just going to enjoy the show,' Malone said. 'I'm not coming here to take over nothing. I think I'll be an all-around better ballplayer here.


He also said he had no pressure in Philly. He wanted pressure free and easy.

It was at the point of matching or sending it to arbitration which nobody wanted. The two owners flew out to meet and Philly agreed to throw in Cleveland’s first pick to avoid seeing what the arbitrator would think was fair for the best big in the game.

Long story short Moses signed to Philly even though Houston was prepared to make him the highest paid player ever(again…as he already was).

He left to play on a super team that didn’t need him to lead. He said it himself.

[Real Men Wear Green]

If Philly hadn't blown it Embiid might have 30ppg'ed their way into the discussion. Jokic with two MVPs is approaching ng an argument but will need Denver to win soon me championships. Which isn't impossible.

[Phoenix]

The Rockets chose not to match the contract, Dr J was 31 and let's be real here he could have joined a bunch of dynasties during his run from Boston to Los Angeles, to Detroit...he could have hitched his wagon to Jordan. It's not nearly the same thing as Shaq running to Wade, Nash, Lebron, and KG

Wade was a good rookie but you're acting like after his rookie year we all knew he was going to end up a top 25 type player. Mosese joining Dr. J was way more a sure thing than Shaq joining Wade.

[post]

https://thumbs.gfycat.com/BrownCelebratedAgama-size_restricted.gif

[90sgoat]

It's Hakeem who will eventually be moved off.

He only has 2 rings, no MVPs.

Jokic could beat him off even though it seems unlikely.

[Bawkish]

It's Hakeem who will eventually be moved off.

He only has 2 rings, no MVPs.

Jokic could beat him off even though it seems unlikely.

Hakeem had both MVP and DPOY in the same season

[Kblaze8855]

This is obviously about to come back up no matter how these next few days go.

Who getting kicked out? Anyone?

Jokic obviously won’t have a top 5 resume but people are really selective on when they want to go resume vs basketball.

[ShawkFactory]

This is obviously about to come back up no matter how these next few days go.

Who getting kicked out? Anyone?

Jokic obviously won’t have a top 5 resume but people are really selective on when they want to go resume vs basketball.

I don't know that I'd have him there just yet. We'll see how they come back next year but assuming that don't blow a 3-1 and then repeat? I think you can very seriously add him to that tier. Maybe not by kicking anyone out of the top 5 but making the top 5 have 6 guys. Seems reasonable.

[RogueBorg]

Moses literally hopped to the team of the previous mvp(before him). It’s only remembered as a trade because before 1988 free agent decisions required compensation or the league would send it to arbitration to decide.

Moses to Philly was absolutely a ring chasing in your prime situation.

The way I remember it, Moses was traded to Philadelphia which opened the door for Houston to draft Ralph Sampson.

[iamgine]

There's only one problem. Moses wasn't nearly as good as Jokic. Heck the years he won MVP? '79 should've gone to Kareem. '82 should've gone to Dr J. '83 should've gone to Larry. And those are not close either.

Jokic though? This playoff is up there with any GOAT at their peak.

[FultzNationRISE]

Jokic easily over Kareem and Wilt.

The stats comparison is meaningless over disparate eras. And theyre all very talented players with a basketball in their hands. You cant make serious arguments for one guy over the others based on tangible ability or performance, especially with the era difference. They all accomplished a ton.

So the separation is intangible (and of course subjective).

Kareem was a soft, delicate little boy. Got rattled easily. Pouted in the media. Always complaining about something.

Wilt was a pretty selfish player and egomaniac. I understand the point about Wilt often being asked to run up the box score for the sake of the box office, but you can also tell by his general self image he had a 7 foot ego. I wouldnt trust him to play entirely for the team in a big game.

Jokic has no weaknesses in leadership. He’s tough when he needs to be, selfish when the team needs it and selfless when the team needs it. He can also hit free throws.

I know change is uncomfortable. And people are welcome to stick with their old favorites using inferior arguments. But it is what it is. Stick people with infallible truth serum and ask who theyd want in a Game 7 with a million bucks on the line, most who claim Jokic is lower than those guys are trusting Jokic first if they have something of their own on the line. That is the truth.

[Kblaze8855]

Jokic easily over Kareem and Wilt.

The stats comparison is meaningless over disparate eras. And theyre all very talented players with a basketball in their hands. You cant make serious arguments for one guy over the others based on tangible ability or performance, especially with the era difference. They all accomplished a ton.

So the separation is intangible (and of course subjective).

Kareem was a soft, delicate little boy. Got rattled easily. Pouted in the media. Always complaining about something.

Wilt was a pretty selfish player and egomaniac. I understand the point about Wilt often being asked to run up the box score for the sake of the box office, but you can also tell by his general self image he had a 7 foot ego. I wouldnt trust him to play entirely for the team in a big game.

Jokic has no weaknesses in leadership. He’s tough when he needs to be, selfish when the team needs it and selfless when the team needs it. He can also hit free throws.

I know change is uncomfortable. And people are welcome to stick with their old favorites using inferior arguments. But it is what it is. Stick people with infallible truth serum and ask who theyd want in a Game 7 with a million bucks on the line, most who claim Jokic is lower than those guys are trusting Jokic first if they have something of their own on the line. That is the truth.


Would depend entirely on the age group of the people you asked. “Most people” aren’t 24. I think most people are 35-70.

Most of the Russell and wilt era has aged out of the discussion but not all of them.

You would be rigging the results of such a poll by deciding how to choose the voters. Just select living sports fans at random the ages are gonna **** you.

[Kblaze8855]

The way I remember it, Moses was traded to Philadelphia which opened the door for Houston to draft Ralph Sampson.


Everyone good was “traded” when they changed teams back then as they worked out a system to replace the no free agency era. You couldn’t just leave a team without compensation. It was literally not allowed if the team you were leaving wanted you to stay. The trades were worked out by force to prevent the leagues people deciding on compensation.

You couldn’t just walk without working out a deal until 1988. First true free agent star to straight up walk without optional compensation was Tom Chambers leaving Seattle for Phoenix.

[FultzNationRISE]

Would depend entirely on the age group of the people you asked. “Most people” aren’t 24. I think most people are 35-70.

Most of the Russell and wilt era has aged out of the discussion but not all of them.

You would be rigging the results of such a poll by deciding how to choose the voters. Just select living sports fans at random the ages are gonna **** you.


I know some people have recency bias and some people have nostalgia bias.

But Im saying, I suspect of the people who will publicly insist on sticking with a ‘classic’ GOAT center candidate… if they had to actually put something of value on the line and pick one guy to ride with, many of them would actually take Jokic. We’ll just never get them to admit it publicly when they dont have to.

[FultzNationRISE]

It’s the same with Lebron btw.

A lot more people than are willing to admit it would take him first if they had to bet real life assets on a player to have success in a given season or series.

[Kblaze8855]

I know some people have recency bias and some people have nostalgia bias.

But Im saying, I suspect of the people who will publicly insist on sticking with a ‘classic’ GOAT center candidate… if they had to actually put something of value on the line and pick one guy to ride with, many of them would actually take Jokic. We’ll just never get them to admit it publicly when they dont have to.


Same issue as before. You’d be rigging the results by setting the parameters. I would absolutely take Jokic over Russell to play the game tonight. I’d take most of the current nbas good bigs. But what makes today the default game to play? The game is 130 something years old. I put all the years of basketball into a random year selector(I was pleasantly surprised to find they exist on Google) and my first 3 results were 1943, 1965, and 2005.

In only one of those results could a modern big play anything close to his game.

If I drop unedited Giannis into 1965…he’s literally being called for a carry 30 times. He literally has almost no legal means of attacking with the ball with rules called that tightly. He’d be a total terror rolling to the basket and getting lobs but he’s gonna have to rebuild on the fly. Why take him over say…Baylor who I know can score 70 legally in that era?

Would Giannis be better in time? Quite possible. Immediately? Ehhhhhh. On defense. But he’s almost unplayable on offense as the player we know.

How do we really judge such things?

The default game modern fans imagine is always the modern game. I ask an old guy why would he take Jokic over Russell when he imagines a game Russell won everything playing? You think he’d assume Jokics 50/30 automatically beats Russell’s teams when guys like Wilt and Baylor could have those games and lose every year?

The “I’m right and you know it!” argument rarely considers just how differently the other side sees reality.

It’s all a matter of perspective. People don’t share the same one. A lot of the people you imagine would take Joker don’t think of the same game you do when you think “basketball” so no….a lot of them wouldn’t.

[SlimReaper]

How do we really judge such things?


Good post.

You have stated some of the reasons that make impossible an impartial comparison between players from different eras. Usually such comparisons end up favouring the modern players, and not only because of recency bias.

Jokic is special. The best thing about him is that he involves his teammates more than any other superstar, and consequently they become better. Team chemistry is IMO the strongest predictor for success, so I have no doubt that he will win more titles in the next years. He will definitely be someday in the top 5, but better to wait.

With all that said, for me the top 5 centers of all time are:

1) Wilt
2) KAJ
3) Hakeem
4) Shaq
5) Moses

(I can’t rank Russell. He was a legend, arguably the best defensive center, great leader, rebounder, passer, but IMO, offensively he was below any of the other guys I included. Obviously, I haven’t watched him play, and I don’t consider much team accolades in individual comparisons.)



If I drop unedited Giannis into 1965…he’s literally being called for a carry 30 times.


He would adapt fast (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLO_du9nBfM). Players with Giannis' work ethic (and physical tools of course) would dominate in any era.

[Kblaze8855]

No modern version of basketball is called as tightly as they did back then. You’d get whistles for a hesi clearly on top of the ball. Those dudes didn’t dribble like toddlers because they couldn’t do any better. Those refs were not ****ing around. 2020s international ball is looser than what they were used to. By a lot.

[Smook A.]

Just based purely on skill and not looking at accomplishments, Jokic is definitely in the top 5

If Jokic gets a ring and FMVP this year, I can confidently say he's a top 8 center of all time right behind Kareem, Wilt, Shaq, Russell, Hakeem, Moses, and D-Rob. To get in that top 5 group, he's gonna need to win at least 2 championships, have 2 FMVPs, and 5-6 more years of elite play

[Full Court]

It's Hakeem who will eventually be moved off.

He only has 2 rings, no MVPs.

Jokic could beat him off even though it seems unlikely.

:milton

[1987_Lakers]

Jokic could be top 5 when his career is done.