Professional and College Basketball Forums banner

Which list is better

1 - 20 of 40 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
146 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
I came up with a few player ranking formulas, and not sure which gave the better result (I'll reveal the formulas a bit later).

List 1:

1. Jordan
2. Kareem
3. Russell
4. Wilt
5. Magic
6. Shaq
7. Duncan
8. Lebron
9. Bird
10. Hakeem
11. Kobe
12. Moses Malone
13. D Robinson
14. Wade
15. Karl Malone
List 2:

1. Jordan
2. Russell
3. Kareem
4. Wilt
5. Magic
6. Duncan
7. Shaq
8. Bird
9. Lebron
10. Moses Malone
11. Hakeem
12. Kobe
13. D Robinson
14. Karl Malone
15. Wade
Yes, no Oscar or West. In fact, they are edged out by Dr. J, Barkley, CP3, and KG.
 

·
Look at your favorite team, now back to mine, mine
Joined
·
8,475 Posts
Both lists suck, so I can't really choose one.
 

·
Look at your favorite team, now back to mine, mine
Joined
·
8,475 Posts
just what would be your top 15?
My top 15 would be the top 15 players who actually DESERVE to be on this list.

Let me start out with the first big flaw in this list, which is Dwayne Wade being on it. In what universe does Wade even come close to being on this list? And on top of all that, how does he beat Dr J??

Russell should not be higher then Wilt, since it's painfully obvious that Wilt was the better player, Lebron shouldn't be here (yet, even though I do agree with him being higher than Kobe), Bird needs to be higher in both lists, as does Magic (by one spot or two), and the thing that is probably wrong the most about these lists is that you have Chris Paul beating Jerry West and Oscar Robertson. Are you ****ing kidding me?! How the hell does Chris Paul beat Jerry West and Oscar Robertson?! Are you insane???

I don't know what formula you used, but it's false, in every freaking way possible.
 

·
.
Joined
·
4,361 Posts
#1... fwiw, it's pretty close to how I rank my top 10.

#1 MJ
2-3 the big 3 centers
5-6 Magic - Bird
7-8 Shaq - Duncan
9-10 Hakeem - Kobe

Some of the guys your formula got from 12-15 I wonder about...
 

·
Last Winter Was The Coldest
Joined
·
2,594 Posts
Irving 100% on point with everything (outside of Kobe/LeBron thing, but that's for another thread)

I've seen some overrating of Chris Paul, but this one is right up there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
146 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
My top 15 would be the top 15 players who actually DESERVE to be on this list.

Let me start out with the first big flaw in this list, which is Dwayne Wade being on it. In what universe does Wade even come close to being on this list? And on top of all that, how does he beat Dr J??

Russell should not be higher then Wilt, since it's painfully obvious that Wilt was the better player, Lebron shouldn't be here (yet, even though I do agree with him being higher than Kobe), Bird needs to be higher in both lists, as does Magic (by one spot or two), and the thing that is probably wrong the most about these lists is that you have Chris Paul beating Jerry West and Oscar Robertson. Are you ****ing kidding me?! How the hell does Chris Paul beat Jerry West and Oscar Robertson?! Are you insane???

I don't know what formula you used, but it's false, in every freaking way possible.
Career PER is part of the formula, which will decrease over wade's career. No formula is perfect.
 

·
Better Call Saul
Joined
·
13,184 Posts
Wade should not be anywhere near these lists and Magic should be higher.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,165 Posts
My top 15 would be the top 15 players who actually DESERVE to be on this list.

Let me start out with the first big flaw in this list, which is Dwayne Wade being on it. In what universe does Wade even come close to being on this list? And on top of all that, how does he beat Dr J??

Russell should not be higher then Wilt, since it's painfully obvious that Wilt was the better player, Lebron shouldn't be here (yet, even though I do agree with him being higher than Kobe), Bird needs to be higher in both lists, as does Magic (by one spot or two), and the thing that is probably wrong the most about these lists is that you have Chris Paul beating Jerry West and Oscar Robertson. Are you ****ing kidding me?! How the hell does Chris Paul beat Jerry West and Oscar Robertson?! Are you insane???

I don't know what formula you used, but it's false, in every freaking way possible.
Young grasshopper has a point.

Your lists suck.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
146 Posts
Discussion Starter #11 (Edited)
Ok... anyway, here's the formula:

List 1
PER + [(League MVP Awards + Finals MVP Awards)*1.5]

List 2
PER + [(League MVP Awards + Finals MVP Awards)*2]

Believe it or not, West and Oscar had relatively low PER in their era, and West has no MVP awards, but one Finals MVP, while Oscar has one MVP and no finals MVP awards.

Wade/Paul are up there because they entered the NBA with some solid experience, and they are their prime years still, so career PER is high, plus Wade has a Finals MVP.

Here's how the numbers work out in list 1
PER + [(MVP+FINALS MVP)*1.5)]
Jordan
27.91 + [(5+6)*1.5] = 44.41
KAJ
(24.58) + [(6+2)*1.5] = 36.58
Russell
(18.87) + [(5+6)*1.5] = 35.37
Wilt
(26.13) + [(4+2)*1.5] =35.13
Magic
(24.11) + [(3+3)*1.5] =33.11
Shaq
(26.43) + [(1+3)*1.5] =32.46
TD
(24.75) + [(2+3)*1.5] =32.25
Lebron
(27.24) + [(2+1)*1.5] =31.74
Bird
(23.5) + [(3+2)*1.5] = 31
Hakeem
(23.59) + [(1+2)*1.5] =28.09
Kobe
(23.44) + [(1+2)*1.5] =27.94
Moses
(22.00) + [(3+1)*1.5] =27.94
Drob
(26.18) + [(0+1)*1.5] =27.68
Dwade
(25.7) + [(0+1)*1.5] =27.2
Kmalone
(23.9) + [(2+0)*1.5] =26.9
Dirk
(23.63) + [(1+1)*1.5] = 26.63
Dr
(23.57) + [(2+0)*1.5] =26.57
CB
(24.63) + [(1+0)*1.5] =26.13
CP
(25.4) + [(0+0)*1.5] = 25.4
KG
(23.32) + [(1+0)*1.5] =24.82
O
(23.17) + [(1+0)*1.5] =24.67
West
(22.9) + [(0+1)*1.5] =24.4
PS: Bill Russell's Finals MVP awards were estimated based on how many Finals he was statistically #1 on his team, which came out to 6.

Flawed as the formula might be, you have to be in awe of MJ being an extreme outlier.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,500 Posts
Career PER is part of the formula, which will decrease over wade's career. No formula is perfect.
isnt PER a number generated relative to a given season's outcomes? that is to say isnt PER standardized based on a season's median values for all stats? it is isnt it? so in your system is a PER of 30 in a pre-merger season given the same weight as one in the first decade post merger? is it given the same weight as the same score in a season in the 90s post expansion? problematic

then again it cant have that much weight since Bill Russell (whose highest 'estimated PER' was 22.8) is so high in your rankings

seems like either iteration of your system has issues and I suspect some pretty suspect assumptions
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
146 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
isnt PER a number generated relative to a given season's outcomes? that is to say isnt PER standardized based on a season's median values for all stats? it is isnt it? so in your system is a PER of 30 in a pre-merger season given the same weight as one in the first decade post merger? is it given the same weight as the same score in a season in the 90s post expansion? problematic

then again it cant have that much weight since Bill Russell (whose highest 'estimated PER' was 22.8) is so high in your rankings

seems like either iteration of your system has issues and I suspect some pretty suspect assumptions
I revealed the formula just before you posted...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,500 Posts
I revealed the formula just before you posted...
and I was right - league MVPs are subjective awards frequently given to the wrong players - Russell over Chamberlain in 61-62, Oscar over Chamberlain in 63-64, Cowens instead of Kareem in 72-73, Walton playing in 58 games in 78 (though similarly injured Kareem played in more games), Barkley instead of Mike in 92-93, Malone instead of Mike in 96-97, Iverson instead of Shaq in 00-01, Nash both seasons was probably not the best player - based on overarching positive or negative media narratives

and said narratives often times ignore the question of who is the best player and focus on who is most 'valuable' to his team - you can make an argument for Nash's relative value to his team but was Nash the best player in the league in either season he won? was he even the 3rd or 4th best player in the league those seasons? was he even close?
 

·
Better Call Saul
Joined
·
13,184 Posts
I'll never understand why people try and create a number based formula when talking about a game as fluid as basketball.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,500 Posts
Understood, but PER is based on the season, and nobody else had steals/blocks counted those seasons either.
there are alot of stats not accounted for from that period - that's kind of my point 1960s PERs are fudgy and guestimated - and again assuming PER is objective across eras assumes that the quality of competition was about the same across eras which it plainly wasnt
 

·
Have a GREAT day!
Joined
·
13,796 Posts
Anyone who interprets MVP to mean the most valuable to his team is an idiot.
 
1 - 20 of 40 Posts
Top