Message Board Basketball Forum - InsideHoops

Message Board Basketball Forum - InsideHoops (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/index.php)
-   NBA Forum (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   THE GREAT DEBATE: Ranking the Greatest Players of All-Time (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=277257)

WillC 09-24-2012 05:32 PM

THE GREAT DEBATE: Ranking the Greatest Players of All-Time
 
One thing has become clear from recent 'greatest player' polls on ISH: the results are heavily influenced by modern fans acting like sheep to vote for their favourite players at the expense of more deserving - but less popular - alternatives. This skews the results in favour of popular and/or modern players.

Something else that I learned was that sometimes I find myself questioning my own judgement after reading a convincing argument written by someone else in favour of a different player.

Indeed, that is why I continue to come back to this forum. Despite the over abundance of childish posters with little knowledge, there is in fact a group of very knowledgeable members whose intelligence and common sense shines through.

All of the above helped me devise an unusual way of ranking players that I am excited about trialling here.

Here is how it will work:

- The goal is to establish an intelligently debated list of the greatest players of all-time.

- Each day, ISH members are invited to nominate a player of their choice.

- You can write a maximum of 200 words to justify your choice.

- Each day, I will select the winning player based upon the most persuasive and convincing nomination.

- Your 200 word nominations might include statistics, quotes, descriptions, explanations and video clips (etc) to help justify your decision.

This method should prove more robust than a poll which, as already mentioned, is a flawed system; I value the opinion of one expert over the votes of many less educated fans. Having said that, if you can write a convincing argument for your player, then I won't discriminate based on the quality of your previous posts. I have no friends or enemies here; I'm as unbiased as it gets.

Criteria for selecting players:

- It's completely up to you. NBA, ABA, pre-NBA, NCAA, individual awards, team success, peak, longevity, style, substance... it's up to you.

The Greatest Players of All-Time:

01 -
02 -
03 -
04 -
05 -
06 -
07 -
08 -
09 -
10 -
11 -
12 -
13 -
14 -
15 -
16 -
17 -
18 -
19 -
20 -
21 -
22 -
23 -
24 -
25 -

BoutPractice 09-24-2012 05:36 PM

Re: THE GREAT DEBATE: Ranking the Greatest Players of All-Time
 
Very interesting concept.

Not the most scientific method, but I love the idea if only for the reasonable arguments it should produce.

Overdrive 09-24-2012 05:40 PM

Re: THE GREAT DEBATE: Ranking the Greatest Players of All-Time
 
I think it's easy to manipulate one person. You're premisse is quite nice, the better the post/argument the more weight in the result, but some players have about the same case for a certain spot and a thought out post might manipulate you into taking a certain player over another, especially if it's one you have a bias towards.

It would be quite better to have a gremium of 10 people, who are educated Jordan, Wilt, Cap, etc homers, who are not allowed to vote for their respective favourite player.

WillC 09-24-2012 05:48 PM

Re: THE GREAT DEBATE: Ranking the Greatest Players of All-Time
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Overdrive
It would be quite better to have a gremium of 10 people, who are educated Jordan, Wilt, Cap, etc homers, who are not allowed to vote for their respective favourite player.


Why?

It is exactly those types of members who have the most knowledge about their favourite player and, therefore, ought to be given the opportunity to share their wisdom.

Having said that, it doesn't mean they'll be able to convince me that their player deserves to be picked next. For example, jlauber might write a phenomenal piece about Wilt Chamberlain, but another member might trump him with an even more persuasive piece about Bill Russell.

I'll simply vote for whoever made the most convincing argument.

For those who wonder what makes me qualified for such a task, my answer is this: I am a teacher (which, in my opinion, is evidence that I am fair), I write for an NBA magazine in my spare time and have generally obsessed over basketball history for as long as I can remember.

But it is the views of others that interests me the most. Hence the methodology behind these greatest of all-time player rankings.

Punpun 09-24-2012 05:53 PM

Re: THE GREAT DEBATE: Ranking the Greatest Players of All-Time
 
Oh god. No, just no. How can you even have the guts to say your mode of choosing is better when you don't even put your choice under review of your "peers aka "experts".

Would be way more pertinent if you chose a group of "experts" and had them pick out of their case for any player the better guy. Thus reaching a consensus.

What you want to do is simply laughable.

Ps: I didn't even partake in the top 100 all-time threads.

Overdrive 09-24-2012 05:57 PM

Re: THE GREAT DEBATE: Ranking the Greatest Players of All-Time
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by WillC
Why?

It is exactly those types of members who have the most knowledge about their favourite player and, therefore, ought to be given the opportunity to share their wisdom.

Having said that, it doesn't mean they'll be able to convince me that their player deserves to be picked next. For example, jlauber might write a phenomenal piece about Wilt Chamberlain, but another member might trump him with an even more persuasive piece about Bill Russell.

I'll simply vote for whoever made the most convincing argument.

For those who wonder what makes me qualified for such a task, my answer is this: I am a teacher (which, in my opinion, is evidence that I am fair), I write for an NBA magazine in my spare time and have generally obsessed over basketball history for as long as I can remember.

But it is the views of others that interests me the most. Hence the methodology behind these greatest of all-time player rankings.


Uh, I think you've mistaken what I meant, I wanted to expand your idea, because I think it's a good way to decide the GOAT-list. I just don't like the idea of one person deciding.

So I think there should be one poster for each of the the socalled top 10 GOAT list instead of just you deciding the winner. That doesn't mean if you pick Jlauber to be the Wilt stan, that he cannot present "his" player as #1, totally the opposite actually. It just means that the other 9 guys can take Wilt as their choice, but not Jlauber. That's what I meant by gremium.

That way homer decitions are avoided.

As for the teacher stance, no disrespect, but teachers get manipulated by their pupils every day.

WillC 09-24-2012 05:58 PM

Re: THE GREAT DEBATE: Ranking the Greatest Players of All-Time
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Punpun
Oh god. No, just no. How can you even have the guts to say your mode of choosing is better when you don't even put your choice under review of your "peers aka "experts".

Would be way more pertinent if you chose a group of "experts" and had them pick out of their case for any player the better guy. Thus reaching a consensus.

What you want to do is simply laughable.

Ps: I didn't even partake in the top 100 all-time threads.


We've seen already that, when voting on a consensus, it results in poor choices.

Ok, so we could have a group of experts rather than letting any old (or, should that be, 'young') ISH member vote.

However, there still might be one person who puts forward a more convincing case than the other 9. But people are too stubborn to shift their way of thinking.

I'll give you an example. It's common belief that Jordan is the greatest player of all-time. I'm of that opinion too. However, I'm open to someone changing my mind.

How open to persuasion would the other experts be?

That's why I like my methodology. Call it a dictatorship if you like, but I am curious to see the arguments for different players, and I will ultimately decide which argument is most convincing.

If you don't like it, then simply don't participate. However, it would be a shame as I encourage as many people as possible to offer their opinion.

WillC 09-24-2012 06:01 PM

Re: THE GREAT DEBATE: Ranking the Greatest Players of All-Time
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Overdrive
Uh, I think you've mistaken what I meant, I wanted to expand your idea, because I think it's a good way to decide the GOAT-list. I just don't like the idea of one person deciding.

So I think there should be one poster for each of the the socalled top 10 GOAT list instead of just you deciding the winner. That doesn't mean if you pick Jlauber to be the Wilt stan, that he cannot present "his" player as #1, totally the opposite actually. It just means that the other 9 guys can take Wilt as their choice, but not Jlauber. That's what I meant by gremium.

That way homer decitions are avoided.


Do you honestly think that even a hand-selected core of experts would value the opinion of jlauber? I'm not buying it. Some users here are more popular than others; people would end up just voting for their favourite ISH members rather than for the most convincing nominations. I personally have no hidden agenda, unlike some members here who write fake obituaries about other members.

Quote:

As for the teacher stance, no disrespect, but teachers get manipulated by their pupils every day.

Outstanding teachers don't.

fpliii 09-24-2012 06:04 PM

Re: THE GREAT DEBATE: Ranking the Greatest Players of All-Time
 
not that I'm opposed to the premise of this thread (I think it's a noble pursuit to try and get multiple lists out there derived using different methods), but doesn't this format reward the superior argument as opposed to the greater player? it's fine if either (a) yourself or the deciding committee is able to parse the arguments successfully (so a great presentation isn't overly weighted) or (b) all presentations follow some sort of standard format, eliminating (or at least limiting) rhetorical bias

Overdrive 09-24-2012 06:04 PM

Re: THE GREAT DEBATE: Ranking the Greatest Players of All-Time
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by WillC
Do you honestly think that even a hand-selected core of experts would value the opinion of jlauber? I'm not buying it. Some users here are more popular than others; people would end up just voting for their favourite ISH members rather than for the most convincing nominations. I personally have no hidden agenda, unlike some members here who write fake obituaries about other members.


That's true, but what, aside from being a teacher, seperates you in that matter?

Quote:

Outstanding teachers don't.

They're very rare. Hope you're one of those.

WillC 09-24-2012 06:08 PM

Re: THE GREAT DEBATE: Ranking the Greatest Players of All-Time
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Overdrive
That's true, but what, aside from being a teacher, seperates you in that matter?


I'm relatively new to this board (and, therefore, not swayed by members' histories), I don't engaged in pointless banter/arguments, and I am only concerned with discussing basketball - nothing more, nothing less.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Overdrive
They're very rare. Hope you're one of those.


In the UK, where I live, I believe 3% of teachers are classified as 'outstanding' by OFSTED (school inspectors). I'm one of them. Cookie for me, please.

WillC 09-24-2012 06:12 PM

Re: THE GREAT DEBATE: Ranking the Greatest Players of All-Time
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by fpliii
not that I'm opposed to the premise of this thread (I think it's a noble pursuit to try and get multiple lists out there derived using different methods), but doesn't this format reward the superior argument as opposed to the greater player? it's fine if either (a) yourself or the deciding committee is able to parse the arguments successfully (so a great presentation isn't overly weighted) or (b) all presentations follow some sort of standard format, eliminating (or at least limiting) rhetorical bias


You're right, my methodology does reward the superior argument. That's precisely what it does. I see no shame in that. It helps eliminate the nominations from less educated users who haven't done their homework while rewarding those users who demonstrate basketball knowledge, common sense and intelligence.

The format of the nominations is up to the individual user. The only restriction is the word limit; I gave it much thought and settled for the 200-word limit because that is sufficient to write plenty while reducing the waffle and long-winded essays.

Overdrive 09-24-2012 06:14 PM

Re: THE GREAT DEBATE: Ranking the Greatest Players of All-Time
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by WillC
I'm relatively new to this board (and, therefore, not swayed by members' histories), I don't engaged in pointless banter/arguments, and I am only concerned with discussing basketball - nothing more, nothing less.


I see, you're very convinced of your nonbias in any way, I'm interested in seeing how it turns out. I still believe a gremium would be better than a "dictator".

Quote:

In the UK, where I live, I believe 3% of teachers are classified as 'outstanding' by OFSTED (school inspectors). I'm one of them. Cookie for me, please.

I gave you an electronic cookie.

SpecialQue 09-24-2012 06:16 PM

Re: THE GREAT DEBATE: Ranking the Greatest Players of All-Time
 
Instead of ranking best to least best, why not just have 10 greatest players listed in alphabetic order, so the retards don't go into full-on hate seizures over certain players being ranked higher?

fpliii 09-24-2012 06:17 PM

Re: THE GREAT DEBATE: Ranking the Greatest Players of All-Time
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by WillC
You're right, my methodology does reward the superior argument. That's precisely what it does. I see no shame in that. It helps eliminate the nominations from less educated users who haven't done their homework while rewarding those users who demonstrate basketball knowledge, common sense and intelligence.

The format of the nominations is up to the individual user. The only restriction is the word limit; I gave it much thought and settled for the 200-word limit because that is sufficient to write plenty while reducing the waffle and long-winded essays.


hm, that's fine then I suppose

do you have any particular criteria in mind? though I guess when there's no objective truth to be uncovered (as is the case with a list like this, no matter what the methodology), that's improbable (and probably counterproductive)


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:41 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. Terms of Use/Service | Privacy Policy