The GOAT List: 2014 Edition

Normally I don't do hypotheticals, but if Kevin Johnson or Tim Hardaway played with Duncan they would take more shots away from Duncan or the rest of the team. They would be less likely to sublimate their ball dominant game within the system than the French Layup Machine. :no:

Since both Parker and Ginobili are part of the greatest winning trio in NBA playoff history, we should reward consistent excellence during the money season over brief spells of transcendent peaks that occurred in the regular season.

Each. And. Every. Time.

Nice discussion everyone. Thanks for giving the thread a little life outside me and Kizzle. I really sincerely do appreciate everyone who follows the list and/or offers feedback. I hope you find these mini-profiles interesting enough to invest in my site or book whenever I get that up for availability. (My need deadline is February 1st 2015 btw, working with a better publisher now that doesn't make me put up my own money)

On the topic at hand, I will delve deeper into it as I get to Manu and Parkers spots on the list (as well as Price, Tim Hardaway and KJ) but I think Parker has, as some of you have suggested, seperated himself from point guards like the aforementioned who may have been more spectacular individually, but for a much shorter period of time and without the same kind of once in a generation team success. Since Duncan showed up, the Spurs have never won less than 50 games (except in shortened seasons where they won at an above 50 game pace) Parker has been durable and thrived in four distinctly different roles. As a young role playing PG from 2002-2005, as a second option from 2005-2008, as the teams best player (2009-2013) and last year as a veteran key cog picking his spots on a balanced team.

That's pretty impressive. Having individual and team success in four different but important roles is something few players have achieved. Though they are different types of players, Parker's career is shaping up like that of Joe Dumars or Dennis Johnson, guys who excelled in multiple roles over a decade plus span.

I respect every ones opinions and can see the case for them all. But would yall put Parker over the likes of Chris Paul Gary Payton and Nate Archibald?

It's the Wilt Chamberlain vs Bill Russell argument. Wilt was the better player but Russell had the greater career.

KJ Payton Price etc might've had higher peaks than Parker in their careers, making them the Wilt, but Parker's career is greater than all of them.
:yaohappy:

[QUOTE=Gotterdammerung]It's the Wilt Chamberlain vs Bill Russell argument. Wilt was the better player but Russell had the greater career.

KJ Payton Price etc might've had higher peaks than Parker in their careers, making them the Wilt, but Parker's career is greater than all of them.
:yaohappy:[/QUOTE]
This isn't close to Wilt vs. Russell. Parker has never been the best player in the NBA. He's never been the best point guard in the NBA.

This is Elgin Baylor vs. John Havlicek.

[CENTER][IMG]http://i.cdn.turner.com/nba/nba/dam/assets/131122182746-vern-mikkelsen-112213.story-top.jpg[/IMG][/CENTER]
[SIZE="4"][B][FONT="Book Antiqua"]#127 Arild Verner Agerskov Mikkelsen
[/FONT][/SIZE][/B]
[B]Tier Classification:[/B] Championship Pieces: Non-Alpha
[B]Years Played (Quality Prime Seasons):[/B] 10 (9)
[B]Primary Role(s):[/B] #2/#3/#4 on Champions and Contenders
[B]Prime Averages: [/B] 15-10-2 on 40/77

[CENTER][B]------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/B]

[IMG]http://i.cdn.turner.com/nba/nba/teamsites/images/legacy/lakers/news_121019_martin_650.jpg[/IMG][/CENTER]
[SIZE="4"][B][FONT="Book Antiqua"]#126 Slater Nelson Martin Jr.
[/FONT][/SIZE][/B]
[B]Tier Classification:[/B] Championship Pieces: Non-Alpha
[B]Years Played (Quality Prime Seasons):[/B] 11 (9)
[B]Primary Role(s):[/B] #3/#4 on Champions and Contenders
[B]Prime Averages: [/B] 11-4-5 on 37/77
[CENTER][B]------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/B][/CENTER]
[SIZE="3"][FONT="Comic Sans MS"]-[SIZE="6"]O[/SIZE]n November 2nd 1949, the NBA debuted as a new league with the merger of the BAA and NBL. The Lakers, winners of the 1948 NBL and 1949 BAA Championships, debuted two new players that day who would help them win four more titles in the next five seasons. They gave up their first round pick to use a territorial selection and take Vern Mikkelsen from Hamline University. They also signed Slater Martin from the University of Texas. In Mikkelsen the Lakers got a 6

Did Jim Pollard make your list?

[QUOTE=L.Kizzle]This isn't close to Wilt vs. Russell. Parker has never been the best player in the NBA. He's never been the best point guard in the NBA.

This is Elgin Baylor vs. John Havlicek.[/QUOTE]
You're missing the point. Missing the forest for the trees. :oldlol:

It's not who's the best player in a specific year or whatever 'moving the goalpost' technique up that sleeve.

It's just plain "who's better, Player X or Player Z" scenario.
Choosing either player demonstrates your criteria, and if you are consistent in applying that criteria across the board then you'll end up with an interesting list unlike the standard GOAT lists out there.

[QUOTE=Gotterdammerung]You're missing the point. Missing the forest for the trees. :oldlol:

It's not who's the best player in a specific year or whatever 'moving the goalpost' technique up that sleeve.

It's just plain "who's better, Player X or Player Z" scenario.
Choosing either player demonstrates your criteria, and if you are consistent in applying that criteria across the board then you'll end up with an interesting list unlike the standard GOAT lists out there.[/QUOTE]
I see where you all are coming from. Parker has the rings and the other guys don't. A lot of foks have Hondo over Elgin Baylor on All-Time list because of the 8 rings to zero comparison. I've never seen them play, but reading up on them and from their peers, Elgin was the flat out better player. KJ, Price and Timmy don't have the rings but have the numbers and accolades to a certain extent.

KJ vs. Tony Parker. I think KJ was a better player. Parker had the better luck of playing with the GOAT PF. I don't think Tony is a bad player by any stretch, he's damn good.

Maybe because he's still playing and can do so much more. He's only 32 he still has a few years left as a top PG. Maybe because he's just very consistent. He never just had that break-put season numbers wise, compared to the current PG and the KJs and Timmy's. Like G.O.A.T said, Joe Dumars. Very consistent, didn't have the numbers his peers had, but got the job done. Billups is another.

It's not travesty to have Parker over them, but you could make a case for KJ and Timmy being over Parker also.

If Tony Parker had Kevin Johnson's numbers, with four ring he's on Magic and Isiah level.

If Kevin Johnson had Tony Parker's numbers, he's Kenny Smith in Sacramento.

[QUOTE=L.Kizzle]If Tony Parker had Kevin Johnson's numbers, with four ring he's on Magic and Isiah level.

If Kevin Johnson had Tony Parker's numbers, he's Kenny Smith in Sacramento.[/QUOTE]
What do you mean "if he had KJ's numbers?" Scoring-wise, they are practically identical:

Per-36 numbers:

Regular season:

KJ: 18.9
Parker: 18.8

Playoffs:

KJ: 18.8
Parker: 19.0

And KJ had a very short career and fell off drastically. In his 11th season, he averaged 9.5/4.9 - compare that with Parker who put up 20.3/7.6 in his 12th season. Parker's already played longer than KJ and probably has 3-5 more years. That's a huge difference.

[CENTER][IMG]http://blacksportsonline.com/home/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/chris-bosh.jpg[/IMG][/CENTER]
[SIZE="4"][B][FONT="Book Antiqua"]#125 Christopher Wesson Bosh [/FONT][/SIZE][/B]
[CENTER][B][SIZE="4"]6

One thing I really like that you do is that you take into account a player's ability to play different roles, and what that means to team success. Personally, I'd rather have a player that is mediocre as a first option, but great as a second or third option, than a player who is great as a first option - though not great enough to win it all - and mediocre to bad as a second or third option. If you accept the fact that the first option player isn't good enough to win it all as a first option, is there every any scenario where he gives you a better chance of winning than the "role" player?

Don't know how I feel about Bosh at that spot. I'm thinking he should be higher, but don't know what bigs might be over him?


Shawn Kemp
Ben Wallace
Jermaine O'Neal
Zelmo Beaty
Paul Gasol
Neil Johnston
Walt Bellamy
Tom Heinsohn
Maurice Lucas

Bosh is someone imo that will probably be overrated as hell after his career is over. From his absurd amount of all-star selections to being a member of the "Big 3", he'll be considered a much better player than he actually was, especially by those who never watched him play.

To me, Bosh is a good player, but he's honestly just nothing special. He was never once relevant to the league in his Toronto days, he put up good numbers on a bad team, not much different from the likes of Elton Brand or Zach Randolph. I attribute him making 9 all-star games due to playing in the East, and I have a hard time believing he'd make even close to that amount had he been playing the West and competing with the likes of Duncan, KG, & Dirk for all-star spots.

Even his contributions in Miami haven't been that great. You cited some of the things he improved, such as his jump shooting and some aspects of his defense, which is commendable. But his impact on the Heat has honestly been underwhelming. He hasn't received any kind of accolade in his 4 seasons in Miami, not a single All-NBA or All-Defensive team selection, and he hasn't even garnered a single MVP vote.

Even what he's done in the playoffs hasn't been that impressive. He was injured for most of the 2012 playoffs and played decently, having maybe 3 good games in that run. However, you cannot say the same about his play 2013. He grabbed that rebound in Game 6 over someone 5 inches shorter than him, fine, but he was terrible in that playoff run, and ABYSMAL in the final two rounds. He averaged 11 & 6 on 42% in the ECF & Finals and got frequently outplayed and even dominated by Hibbert & Duncan.

In conclusion, Bosh is a good player, nothing more, nothing less, and would have absolutely irrelevant to the history of the league had he not joined a team with a top 10 & top 25 player of all time in their primes.