Poll of the Day > I've always argued that Bill Russell/Kareem > MJ, hence MJ is 3rd

(+) Yeah! (+)

I never realised though that there were nearly half as many teams when Russell played. Which kind of puts a downer on my argument, if there were twice as much competition would Russell have had half as many rings? Would he then be on par with Michael? Possibly giving the edge to MJ?

Who knows. I'd still put Russell and Kareem over MJ, you can't argue with stats. And MJ is probably considered the goat cause he played at a time when basketball was getting more media coverage and was able to build his brand more. So more people grew up on MJ than they did bill russell and Kareem.

I'd like to hear an argument of MJ being better than those two tbqh, and MJ is arguably fourth greatest of all time when you take Wilt into consideration. You can make the argument 6 rings > 2 rings but then again 30PPG and 20RPG > 30PPG and 5rpg soo
---

I think scoring and rebounding in general were just much higher in Wilt's era. Weren't 20+ RPG seasons common for several players at that time? They played at a much faster pace, meaning there were more scoring opportunities as well as rebounding opportunities. A guy like Wilt could dominate because there was no three-point line, but now that there is, you can't rely on only playing in the paint.


There's a certain extent that I don't think you should punish players for the era they played in, but you also gotta ask if they really would be the same player in today's game. Kareem and Wilt came around a time when 7 footers were rare. Bill Russell would not have won so many championships in a bigger league or as a center that's the size of most PFs now (or most PFs in the early 2000s, at least, since it seems to be trending smaller again).

I will say Kareem definitely doesn't get enough love for the GOAT status though. He's the all-time scoring leader, has the rings and a bunch of other awards and accolades, played partially in the same era as MJ, and is just generally a great person and ambassador for the game.

Pretty sure FA is a noted troll alt, even if putting MJ in third wasn't a dead giveaway.
---

DorkLink posted...

you also gotta ask if they really would be the same player in today's game. Kareem and Wilt came around a time when 7 footers were rare. Bill Russell would not have won so many championships in a bigger league or as a center that's the size of most PFs now (or most PFs in the early 2000s

That's true, I've read this before - seems counterintuitive to me that we've got more 7 footers today though since I'm used to everything going "small" nowadays

When did the league start to get bigger anyway? Cause Shaq was dominant as hell in the paint, he wasn't going up against defenders much smaller than him. If Shaq could dominate you'd like to think Kareem, Wilt and Russell could

Zeus posted...

even if putting MJ in third wasn't a dead giveaway

4th*

Give me a sound argument or deal with it scrub
---

Larry Bird is criminally underrated in the GOAT discussions. The guy was absolutely unreal in his prime.

Zeus posted...

Pretty sure FA is a noted troll alt, even if putting MJ in third wasn't a dead giveaway.

lol dude's been posting on this board longer than you have and some of us have interacted with him personally.
---

Duck-I-Says posted...

Larry Bird is criminally underrated in the GOAT discussions. The guy was absolutely unreal in his prime.

Yeah but you arguably can't even put him over LeBron, except for being a closer

I agree though he doesn't get enough love didn't he average a double double for his career lol
---

RCtheWSBC posted...

Zeus posted...

Pretty sure FA is a noted troll alt, even if putting MJ in third wasn't a dead giveaway.

lol dude's been posting on this board longer than you have and some of us have interacted with him personally.

I'll have you know Zeus is the foremost scholar in the field of PotD Studies.
---

Kareem blew it for me when his family lost in Family Feud. GOAT at basketball but can't win a simple gameshow? I don't think so.

Now I know what you're thinking: that Family Feud game happened when he was way past his prime, so it shouldn't count. But that's not why he lost; he lost because the game has simply passed him up. I don't think even prime Kareem would have been able to hang with today's families. When you're talking GOAT, you've got to account for the differences between eras and his was simply less demanding.

Edit: That said, it was great to see one of the greats at it again and he has nothing to be ashamed of having his family give it their all on national TV like that.
---

As a Boston Celtics fan, I've always felt that Larry Bird was the best Celtic because Russell played against less (and WAY worse) teams than Bird did. Bird is the best Celtic.

MJ is still the best though.
---

On the other hand, the less teams argument works both ways. Say that half the teams would be removed from today's league. Half of the league's starters would instantly become backups. On the other hand, the players weren't as talented 50 years ago as they are today.
---

I'm not a basketball fan, so not only do I not have a horse in this race, but I'm also not going to be citing any stats or the like to really take any sides.

But it IS worth keeping in mind the overall impact each player had on the sport at the time they were playing. Yes, MJ helped his team win a lot (but he also had the benefit of a good team around him, so it wasn't entirely single-handed), whereas Kareem was so good and so singularly beyond everyone else on the court that they literally changed the rules of the sport to handicap him.

Granted, if you had a time machine and could grab all of your top-tier players and put them on the court at the same time and compare them directly, someone like MJ might be more objectively superior... but on the flip-side, the fact that someone like Kareem seems as if he was more subjectively superior to everyone else he was playing against at the time makes his skills far more impressive overall.


---

ParanoidObsessive posted...

I'm not a basketball fan, so not only do I not have a horse in this race, but I'm also not going to be citing any stats or the like to really take any sides.

But it IS worth keeping in mind the overall impact each player had on the sport at the time they were playing. Yes, MJ helped his team win a lot (but he also had the benefit of a good team around him, so it wasn't entirely single-handed), whereas Kareem was so good and so singularly beyond everyone else on the court that they literally changed the rules of the sport to handicap him.

Granted, if you had a time machine and could grab all of your top-tier players and put them on the court at the same time and compare them directly, someone like MJ might be more objectively superior... but on the flip-side, the fact that someone like Kareem seems as if he was more subjectively superior to everyone else he was playing against at the time makes his skills far more impressive overall.

Good take.

Also, as training, recovery and dietary regimes, as well as science around sports all get more advanced, players in general are getting better all the time. Especially since basketball has grown, and continues to grow greatly in popularity.
---

DorkLink posted...

and is just generally a great person

Unlike MJ.
---

crinalex posted...

Also, as training, recovery and dietary regimes, as well as science around sports all get more advanced, players in general are getting better all the time. Especially since basketball has grown, and continues to grow greatly in popularity.

Yeah, that's the flip-side of the coin that makes it so hard to accurately compare athletes in any sport across time periods .

Because, on the one hand, you can say that "athlete's today put up consistently better numbers statistically", or in team sports, "athlete's today put up worse stats, but are also performing against far more fierce competition," but on the other hand, we'll never really know just how good someone from the past could have been if they'd been raised in a time where they had access to the best nutritional and training information, the most cutting-edge equipment, and the opportunity to improve their personal game even more by performing against stronger opponents. Even minor factors like the quality of sneakers or the uniform a player is wearing could easily nudge the advantage to a modern player over an older player regardless of purely inherent skill and/or potential.


---

ParanoidObsessive posted...

whereas Kareem was so good and so singularly beyond everyone else on the court that they literally changed the rules of the sport to handicap him.

That happened to Wilt as well.

Didn't read topic

Tc when you make these rankings, have you actually seen ANY of these players play the game of basketball? Not just clips, but like whole games?

Aren't there also a lot of "Jordan rules" or am I thinking of Gretzky or both

I think it's safe to say Jordan was the Kareem of the crop ;)

I can agree with MJ at #3, though MJ beats him at #1 ^_^
---

MICHALECOLE posted...

Tc when you make these rankings, have you actually seen ANY of these players play the game of basketball? Not just clips, but like whole games?

I'm like 26 years old and grew up in the backwaters of Africa you think I've seen entire 90's bulls and 80's lakers games? lol

But nah on the real I haven't, clips and highlights are all I've got - and stats more than anything.

Really if you wanna compare like for like though, Kareem has the sky hook. People shouldn't overlook the fact that it was virtually unguardable, I know it's been blocked by Wilt and a few other guys but on a day to day, you literally can't block it. There's a reason he's scored the most points all time.

Idk what Mike's go to move was but I'd be shocked if it could hold a candle to the sky hook.
---

Duck-I-Says posted...

ParanoidObsessive posted...

whereas Kareem was so good and so singularly beyond everyone else on the court that they literally changed the rules of the sport to handicap him.

That happened to Wilt as well.

Yeah, Wilt is the first when it comes to mind with this for me. But MJ has won tons more than he has.
---

FatalAccident posted...

Idk what Mike's go to move was but I'd be shocked if it could hold a candle to the sky hook.

Mike's fadeaway jumper was pretty unstoppable.
---

FatalAccident posted...

Duck-I-Says posted...

ParanoidObsessive posted...

whereas Kareem was so good and so singularly beyond everyone else on the court that they literally changed the rules of the sport to handicap him.

That happened to Wilt as well.

Yeah, Wilt is the first when it comes to mind with this for me. But MJ has won tons more than he has.

Wilt was a selfish record chaser who was only interested in leading in every individual stat. He was apparently so bad about it that if he would basically stop playing defense if he was about to foul out so that he could score more points in the game. MJ is also in credibly self-centered, but his concern more about his team getting the most wins than it was about inflating his own stats. That's why he's better.

I will give this to Wilt, though, he might be the single greatest athlete every to play in the NBA. Some of the shit he did on that 280-300lbs frame just defies belief:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GhXzPvmCfVI

38 years old, 300+lbs, post-knee surgery and he could still out jump almost everyone in the NBA today. Then of course on top of that he had absolutely freakish strength:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=huF3PFXU-V0 (though I doubt that title is right. I've always read he was in the high 200s, maybe low 300s. 315 is approaching shaq level)

The guy is like the pinnacle of physical specimens. Just imagine how freakish he would be with modern gear, diet and training.