Gauging Interest in a Community Top 50 Project

The Guru

G.O.A.T.
Hey guys,

In a recent thread a couple of posters and I were talking about the problems of our current discussions given the lack of clarity about what each of us means when we're talking and what criteria we're using. It reminded me of the value of projects on another forum I post on about basketball. These projects tend to be super rewarding and I have learned a ton about basketball from them so I want to see if people would be interested in doing something similar here.

Over there they have done projects where they discuss and vote on the greatest players ever, greatest peaks ever (by season), greatest teams ever, player of the year for every year, and more. Each of these projects were filled with people's research and thoughts which were super informative and interesting to read through.

I think if done correctly we could do something similar here with greatest players, matches, peaks etc.

Here is a link to their most recent GOAT player project: https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=2004777

Such a project would take a lot of time and would need some members of the community to help me run it but I think if done right it could be very rewarding.

Here's an example good post so people can get a feel for what I'm talking about:
1st vote: Pau Gasol
Another decent star with outstanding longevity, Pau entered the league at age 21 and was immediately probably a top 30 player in the league (basically borderline All-Star level player): averaged 17.6/8.9/2.7 @ +4.6% rTS and 2.1 bpg, though admittedly for a terrible team, and kinda turnover-prone as a rookie. tbf, it wasn't much of a cast around him: Shane Battier is a very underrated player (though perhaps cast too high when the 2nd [or arguably 1st??] best player on a team); after that it was Jason Williams and Stromile Swift as 3rd and 4th, and mostly trash behind that.
So overall....pretty good coming out party for the rookie.

In '06 he averaged 20.4/8.9/4.6 @ +1.9% rTS with 1.9 bpg for a team that won 49 games and had the 5th-rated +3.74 SRS (this was with Shane Battier, Mike Miller, an OLD Eddie Jones, and a bunch of spare parts, btw). They were swept in the first round, though due to a brutal WC [and even more brutal SW division that contained the defending champs and the eventual WC champ] and the stupid playoff structure of the time they drew the 60-win Mavericks team (you know, the one that would win the conference). Pau did struggle a bit in the series.

If you somehow blend these two seasons, you get an idea of what "average" P.Gasol was in Memphis.

But in '08 Kobe was barking at the Lakers to either make them a contender or he'd walk, so they bring in Pau......and he almost immediately meshes as the perfect Dick Grayson to Kobe's Bruce Wayne, making the Lakers an instant contender.
Pau would have likely his three BEST seasons as a Laker [from '09-'11], collectively averaging 18.7/10.3/3.4 on approximately +5(ish)% rTS, good turnover economy, and decent defense during those years. They'd win two titles, with Pau playing pretty good in both runs ('10 in particular: 19.6 ppg @ +5.6% rTS, 11.1 rpg, 3.5 apg, 2.1 bpg, and only 1.9 topg.....that's a really nice line).

He'd continue to have relevant seasons all the way out to his 17th season (age 37), ultimately sitting 30th in NBA/ABA history in career rs WS (and currently tied for 40th all-time [w/ Clyde Drexler] in ps WS). He's actually ahead of Chauncey Billups in rs WS [and WS love Chauncey], though is behind Chauncey in ps WS.

He lacks All-NBA accolades more because his prime overlaps that of Tim Duncan [#5 on this list], Kevin Garnett [#11 on this list], and Dirk Nowitzki [#15 on this list]---as well as much of Lebron James [#1 on this list] and other sporadically excellent forwards such as Paul Pierce, Elton Brand, Shawn Marion, and Chris Bosh----than from him lacking All-NBA chops.
I've little doubt that if his competition was John Havlicek, Billy Cunningham, Truck Robinson, Gus Johnson, Bob Love, and Elvin Hayes......Pau would have a few more than he does [likely including at least one 1st Team nod].

At any rate, I think he at least deserves serious consideration at this stage.


2nd vote: Gary Payton
Was about 7-10 places higher on him until just very recently. But he's certainly big in the picture by this point [maybe even overdue??].
Criticized for low shooting efficiency [fair enough point], but he's also got a fantastic turnover economy. Better, for instance, than guys like Jason Kidd, Tim Hardaway, Allen Iverson, Isiah Thomas, Joe Dumars, and John Stockton to name a handful; not much worse than Chris Paul, actually.
Obviously strong defensive acumen early in his prime. Was at the forefront of perhaps the 3rd-best team of the 90s [solid decade as far as competition; giving 1st and 2nd to the Bulls and Jazz, btw]. WS/48 is NOT in love with him [due to aforementioned pedestrian shooting efficiency], yet he's STILL 28th all-time in rs WS.

Best 7-year RAPM added [utilizing Elgee's AuPM as proxy for '94-'96] is right in the immediate vicinity of guys like Russell Westbrook, Arvydas Sabonis, Hakeem Olajuwon, Andre Iguodala, James Harden, Baron Davis, and Penny Hardaway. So pretty good company for this stage of the list, especially noting Payton played more minutes than any of them in their respective samples: nearly 39 mpg on average in those 7 years, while missing just ONE game total [not a typo].


3rd vote: Dwight Howard
Truly there are a number of guys on my immediate radar for this final spot: Kevin McHale, Robert Parish, and Ray Allen all feel perfectly appropriate to me as well. Everyone else in the immediate vicinity on my ATL have already been voted in. The next-closest competitors for me are probably Bob Lanier, Manu Ginobili, Allen Iverson, and Anthony Davis.......but they're all distinctly separated from the others noted above.

Popular opinion on Dwight has REALLY dwindled in the last half-dozen or so years. I feel people have forgotten just how good he was in that '09-'11 range. imo, he peaked in the same general vicinity as bigs like Anthony Davis and Patrick Ewing. This was a guy who was anchoring ON AVERAGE a -5.3 rDRTG during those three years (worst was -4.3, best was -6.4===>which, if I've counted right, is tied [with the '12 and '69 Celtics] for the 23rd-best defense EVER; 12 of those ahead belong to either Russell or Duncan [it's better than ANYTHING anchored by Dikembe, Hakeem, or Wilt]).
He did so without an assortment of true defensive specialists around him (decent ones, for sure; but not great ones).
They simultaneously managed to build some fairly successful offenses around him, by basically just surrounding him with shooters and daring teams to double-team him. Dwight was arguably the best big-man finisher outside of prime Shaq when he got the ball down low. He was just so strong and such an explosive leaper......teams were screwed if he got the ball down there.
Surrounded by mostly what I would call "good role players" he actually led one team to the NBA finals in this span.

While his prime dwindled very quickly after his back injury/surgery in '12, it's not like he was instantly ineffective. He still had some fair/decent years out to around '15 or so, and then of course a somewhat happy resurgence in a 6MOY-candidate kind of role for a title team last year. Not to mention he had a few fairly decent years BEFORE that '09-'11 span, too.
All-around it amounts to a career that looks relatively well-positioned for a top 50 placement, imo.

Would people be interested in doing such a project and if so which one would people like to do the most matches, players, or peaks?
 
Potential Rule Set Mostly Copied Over:
Anyone and everyone is free to participate in the discussion during the course of this project. However, the voter pool will be pre-approved by a panel of moderators. Tenured posters in good standing will be allowed into the voter pool immediately.
Brand new/unknown posters [or posters with questionable records] may be asked to participate in the discussion WITHOUT having a counted vote for a few threads, to demonstrate at least reasonably capable knowledge, genuine intent, and ability to converse in a respectful manner. If they pass this brief “trial period”, they will then be added to the eligible voter list below.

Pending details of user record and history, that “trial period” may be longer for some than it is for others.

But here’s the important part: if you wish to participate as part of the voter panel, YOU MUST STATE YOUR DESIRE TO VOTE IN THE PROJECT IN THIS THREAD (though this is not required to participate in the general discussion).

Given we are free to establish our own criteria, please be aware as we move thru this project that the criteria of other posters will often differ from your own. As such, there isn’t always a “right and wrong” to every question…...just differing value systems. Please hold that in mind and be respectful to one and other.

If you’re going to participate, I would like it if you would take a little time [if you haven’t already done so] to outline your criteria in this thread. That way, anyone you are debating with/against can at least get an idea of where you’re coming from. While the resulting list is always a big curiosity for me, too, it’s the discussion that I hope we can make vibrant, textured, and useful for future reference.

We vote for one position/rank at a time, starting with the #1 thread, and proceeding to #50.

Each thread will be open for approximately 48 hours (occasionally longer as circumstance may dictate, especially if there's a need of a runoff vote). [If you do the math, you realize that means this project will take 3-4 months to complete; it takes serious dedication to consistently contribute from start to finish.]

You MUST provide some arguments/reasoning in support of your vote for it to be counted. That reasoning must pass a minimum standard of relevance or validity---->pretty easy bar to clear. As long as you're not doing something completely mindless and infantile like basing your order strictly on # of titles or something super extraneous like basing it on which players you enjoyed watching the most, you'll be fine.
That reasoning must also pass a minimum standard of volume of content. You don't need to write a novel, but a single line may be deemed insufficient [particularly if the one line is particularly light on content or relevance].

You are allowed to change your vote if you feel compelled to do so. Generally speaking it probably creates the least confusion/mistakes in counting votes if you change your ORIGINAL vote post, and then just give the chair a heads-up about it.

Voting is done through a ranked vote system. You vote for three people and if your top person is eliminated it goes down to your second choice then your 3rd until a majority is reached.

Example:
10 votes for A 8 votes for B 3 Votes for C and 2 Votes for D. 2 D votes are eliminated second rank on these votes are B and C respectively. Now its 10 to 9 to 4. C is eliminated and the second rank for the C voters is 1 As and 2 Bs and the 3rd rank on the D voter who had C second is B. Now it's 12 to 11 B. B has the majority B wins.

In the event of no majority the Condorcet method is used.
 
This would be amazing. Fun. Probably really hard to do. And I think the netizens on TTW are probably not equipped to do so, anywhere near as well as the realGm folks are, mostly because of the surface differences mucking things up.

But I’m in, either way.
 
I think I am going to suck at this if I was to join. How many people do you need anyway?
 
This would be amazing. Fun. Probably really hard to do. And I think the netizens on TTW are probably not equipped to do so, anywhere near as well as the realGm folks are, mostly because of the surface differences mucking things up.

But I’m in, either way.
After the first 3 votes of a players project I imagine things would get much better. We could also start with something more basic like doing a player of the year project voting on the top 5 seasons from each year to get a gauge of things and establish a pool of quality posters who would add to something like this. Or maybe we could do matches because that would probably incite the least amount of fan wars. Open to ideas for sure and you would be one of the people I'd ask to help run/manage this with me.
 
You guys better start watching old matches fully before discussing:) Looks fun, I would certainly enjoy reading it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RS
Wait, you want this place to work like an actual forum? :-D :-D :-D
And you’re willing to be exclusive and have some VIP stuff going on to get it done? :-D:-D:-D
Personally, I’m sure it’d be a good read but I think a lot of the things you’d do to make it happen kind of go against a public forum.
But if you’re organised and web literate you could probably make and manage your own blog and let us all read it.
 
I'm in. Will be difficult to manage, might need to appoint an impartial moderator or something.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RS
I'm in. Will be difficult to manage, might need to appoint an impartial moderator or something.
Ideally the only moderation necessary is vote counting and posting new threads. Though it’s possible people will create new accounts to vote twice and other such nonsense and in that case we will need some moderation to make this work. I think a decent starting policy would be if you have 1000 posts you can vote if you’re under then you have to participate for a couple threads before you can vote.
 
I'm pretty sure this won't change the mood of this place. Anyway, you know my general position, if you feel like listening to more of it suit yourself.
 
I'm pretty sure this won't change the mood of this place. Anyway, you know my general position, if you feel like listening to more of it suit yourself.
Yeah sure it's impossible to change opinions sometimes. But if certain posters are on it maybe something will be gained.
 
I would like to see how it goes with the oldies.

Because tennis even before open era is frequently discussed all the time.
 
Hey guys,

In a recent thread a couple of posters and I were talking about the problems of our current discussions given the lack of clarity about what each of us means when we're talking and what criteria we're using. It reminded me of the value of projects on another forum I post on about basketball. These projects tend to be super rewarding and I have learned a ton about basketball from them so I want to see if people would be interested in doing something similar here.

Over there they have done projects where they discuss and vote on the greatest players ever, greatest peaks ever (by season), greatest teams ever, player of the year for every year, and more. Each of these projects were filled with people's research and thoughts which were super informative and interesting to read through.

I think if done correctly we could do something similar here with greatest players, matches, peaks etc.

Here is a link to their most recent GOAT player project: https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=2004777

Such a project would take a lot of time and would need some members of the community to help me run it but I think if done right it could be very rewarding.

Here's an example good post so people can get a feel for what I'm talking about:
1st vote: Pau Gasol
Another decent star with outstanding longevity, Pau entered the league at age 21 and was immediately probably a top 30 player in the league (basically borderline All-Star level player): averaged 17.6/8.9/2.7 @ +4.6% rTS and 2.1 bpg, though admittedly for a terrible team, and kinda turnover-prone as a rookie. tbf, it wasn't much of a cast around him: Shane Battier is a very underrated player (though perhaps cast too high when the 2nd [or arguably 1st??] best player on a team); after that it was Jason Williams and Stromile Swift as 3rd and 4th, and mostly trash behind that.
So overall....pretty good coming out party for the rookie.

In '06 he averaged 20.4/8.9/4.6 @ +1.9% rTS with 1.9 bpg for a team that won 49 games and had the 5th-rated +3.74 SRS (this was with Shane Battier, Mike Miller, an OLD Eddie Jones, and a bunch of spare parts, btw). They were swept in the first round, though due to a brutal WC [and even more brutal SW division that contained the defending champs and the eventual WC champ] and the stupid playoff structure of the time they drew the 60-win Mavericks team (you know, the one that would win the conference). Pau did struggle a bit in the series.

If you somehow blend these two seasons, you get an idea of what "average" P.Gasol was in Memphis.

But in '08 Kobe was barking at the Lakers to either make them a contender or he'd walk, so they bring in Pau......and he almost immediately meshes as the perfect Dick Grayson to Kobe's Bruce Wayne, making the Lakers an instant contender.
Pau would have likely his three BEST seasons as a Laker [from '09-'11], collectively averaging 18.7/10.3/3.4 on approximately +5(ish)% rTS, good turnover economy, and decent defense during those years. They'd win two titles, with Pau playing pretty good in both runs ('10 in particular: 19.6 ppg @ +5.6% rTS, 11.1 rpg, 3.5 apg, 2.1 bpg, and only 1.9 topg.....that's a really nice line).

He'd continue to have relevant seasons all the way out to his 17th season (age 37), ultimately sitting 30th in NBA/ABA history in career rs WS (and currently tied for 40th all-time [w/ Clyde Drexler] in ps WS). He's actually ahead of Chauncey Billups in rs WS [and WS love Chauncey], though is behind Chauncey in ps WS.

He lacks All-NBA accolades more because his prime overlaps that of Tim Duncan [#5 on this list], Kevin Garnett [#11 on this list], and Dirk Nowitzki [#15 on this list]---as well as much of Lebron James [#1 on this list] and other sporadically excellent forwards such as Paul Pierce, Elton Brand, Shawn Marion, and Chris Bosh----than from him lacking All-NBA chops.
I've little doubt that if his competition was John Havlicek, Billy Cunningham, Truck Robinson, Gus Johnson, Bob Love, and Elvin Hayes......Pau would have a few more than he does [likely including at least one 1st Team nod].

At any rate, I think he at least deserves serious consideration at this stage.


2nd vote: Gary Payton
Was about 7-10 places higher on him until just very recently. But he's certainly big in the picture by this point [maybe even overdue??].
Criticized for low shooting efficiency [fair enough point], but he's also got a fantastic turnover economy. Better, for instance, than guys like Jason Kidd, Tim Hardaway, Allen Iverson, Isiah Thomas, Joe Dumars, and John Stockton to name a handful; not much worse than Chris Paul, actually.
Obviously strong defensive acumen early in his prime. Was at the forefront of perhaps the 3rd-best team of the 90s [solid decade as far as competition; giving 1st and 2nd to the Bulls and Jazz, btw]. WS/48 is NOT in love with him [due to aforementioned pedestrian shooting efficiency], yet he's STILL 28th all-time in rs WS.

Best 7-year RAPM added [utilizing Elgee's AuPM as proxy for '94-'96] is right in the immediate vicinity of guys like Russell Westbrook, Arvydas Sabonis, Hakeem Olajuwon, Andre Iguodala, James Harden, Baron Davis, and Penny Hardaway. So pretty good company for this stage of the list, especially noting Payton played more minutes than any of them in their respective samples: nearly 39 mpg on average in those 7 years, while missing just ONE game total [not a typo].


3rd vote: Dwight Howard
Truly there are a number of guys on my immediate radar for this final spot: Kevin McHale, Robert Parish, and Ray Allen all feel perfectly appropriate to me as well. Everyone else in the immediate vicinity on my ATL have already been voted in. The next-closest competitors for me are probably Bob Lanier, Manu Ginobili, Allen Iverson, and Anthony Davis.......but they're all distinctly separated from the others noted above.

Popular opinion on Dwight has REALLY dwindled in the last half-dozen or so years. I feel people have forgotten just how good he was in that '09-'11 range. imo, he peaked in the same general vicinity as bigs like Anthony Davis and Patrick Ewing. This was a guy who was anchoring ON AVERAGE a -5.3 rDRTG during those three years (worst was -4.3, best was -6.4===>which, if I've counted right, is tied [with the '12 and '69 Celtics] for the 23rd-best defense EVER; 12 of those ahead belong to either Russell or Duncan [it's better than ANYTHING anchored by Dikembe, Hakeem, or Wilt]).
He did so without an assortment of true defensive specialists around him (decent ones, for sure; but not great ones).
They simultaneously managed to build some fairly successful offenses around him, by basically just surrounding him with shooters and daring teams to double-team him. Dwight was arguably the best big-man finisher outside of prime Shaq when he got the ball down low. He was just so strong and such an explosive leaper......teams were screwed if he got the ball down there.
Surrounded by mostly what I would call "good role players" he actually led one team to the NBA finals in this span.

While his prime dwindled very quickly after his back injury/surgery in '12, it's not like he was instantly ineffective. He still had some fair/decent years out to around '15 or so, and then of course a somewhat happy resurgence in a 6MOY-candidate kind of role for a title team last year. Not to mention he had a few fairly decent years BEFORE that '09-'11 span, too.
All-around it amounts to a career that looks relatively well-positioned for a top 50 placement, imo.

Would people be interested in doing such a project and if so which one would people like to do the most matches, players, or peaks?
Regardless you never gave your scale on the RG 21 SF thread ;)
 
Screen_Shot_2020-07-24_at_11.33.38_AM.jpg


Just me personally though, seems really cool for people interested
 
After the first 3 votes of a players project I imagine things would get much better. We could also start with something more basic like doing a player of the year project voting on the top 5 seasons from each year to get a gauge of things and establish a pool of quality posters who would add to something like this. Or maybe we could do matches because that would probably incite the least amount of fan wars. Open to ideas for sure and you would be one of the people I'd ask to help run/manage this with me.
Good idea. In
 
Back
Top