Hoops

Comparing players from different eras

NFI all of you

Most y'all got no clue what you talk about. All stats, all counting titles, but y'all never sat the eye test with these players. Y'all just spouting opinion.

[And nothing more meaningless in this world than opinion, besides to the person holding it.]

Maybe so, but why are you posting on a basketball forum full of opinions?

And I guess you watch basketball games with the commentary turned off?

""The idea that you can't compare across eras is nonsense"

"Secondly a player can only be measured against the competition available to him."

Don't these two statements contradict each other?"

not if you really think about it.

I a player plays in an era where the dilution of talent was immense, and the difference between top on bottom near insurmountable, then a "superstar" who played in a team full of mediocrity, and thus got huge minutes, 80% of plays run for him/her may well get some individual awards and personal recognition, but can reasonably easily be seen as not so great as a player who was in a tight tough league within a team that they were very important, but not 80% important

eg
Joe Hurst vs Leroy Loggins
Reg Biddings vs Dwaine McClain

it makes for an interesting "what if" discussion, but if a player is totally respected and even feared as competitors by other "superstars" of their time, and there are enough of THOSE in numbers and quality to make it an interesting era vs era discussion, then the two can be compared and have a solid majority consensus choice between the two players.

eg
Heal vs Cal Bruton , i'd say a solid 75%+ majority of those players who played with/against those two, and the few who overlapped both. would go with Cal

[LV - no Bill Russell?

What's the logic there?]

I apply a bit of a discount because there were only 9 teams and no salary cap when Russell's Celtics were winning year after year.

Also, although Russell won 5 MVP's, he wasn't alone as a dominant big man in his own era- in his first 3 MVP seasons he didn't even make the All NBA first team. Dolph Schayes and Wilt Chamberlain got in ahead of him.

LV - no Bill Russell?

What's the logic there?

Jordan
Daylight
Kareem and Lebron

Those seem a clear top 3.

After that, tough to split them.

1. Lebron
2. Curry
3. Westbrook
4. Harden
5. Jordan

I think you need to have lived through and observed every generation starting with Wilt to now, only those ppl would be able to have an unbiased view.

Russell
Jordan
Le Bron

Agree with all that is said - however Jordan and Le Bron had it so easy off the court.

Russell had to cope with being African American ina time of turmoil.

Lebron is better than MJ

It’s impossible, just enjoy it for what it is.

You can compare. You just compare them directly. It's not a new players fault that they play in the 'new era' and its not the old players fault they didn't. If a new era player has better stats than an older player because of the three point shot etc.. tough shit. The different era, tougher in the 80's, no three point line arguements are getting so old and tired. New school players have access to much better science and conditioning and therefore will end up accumulating more career stats. If that ends up meaning they have a BETTER career then suck it up, tough shit. You achieved less.

Years ago someone accepted this challenge and they did it statistically.

They was it was done was using standard deviations. I'll pick on cricket because of Don Bradman. So, the statistician looked at average scores of teams and batsmen and then looked at the standard deviation. For those of you who were asleep in maths, or whose school time was some time ago, 68% of the population should be within 1 SD, 95% 2 SD and 99% 3 SD.

So knowing the average batting score was X in the 1930s, they found that Bradman's average was 4 SDs away from the average. The same could be done with basketball and was done with Michael Jordan, who I think scored 3. something SDs.

So, comparing Larry Bird and Lebron James would be "relatively simple", but to do so and in order to acknowledge the difference in the games styles, it could be done statistically by looking at their performances compared to the rest of the league and working out what SDs they are away. I suspect you would look at the key statistics of obviously PPG, Shooting %, FT%, 3P shots, rebounds per game (O and D) as well as turnovers and steals. From there, one could accumulate the SDs and work out who has the higher number and who is the better player.

Is a new venue to play in the best way to bring back interest or boost profits. Perths new arena has been getting them 5k extra people into the arena and giving them a near 1m profit. What yall think.