1. Jordan
2. LeBron
3. Magic
4. Kareem
5. Duncan
6. Shaq
7. Bird
8. Wilt
9. Olajuwon
10. Russell

-He was arguably the greatest leader in basketball history.
-He was the most versatile as he could play all 5 positions (he wouldn't be a very good SG though since his range was limited, but he could shot well 10-15ft away). Magic played an entire Finals game playing center when Kareem went down and won it.
-He only played 13 seasons (I don't count the 13th season tbh since he returned after 5 years retirement, played just 32 games + didn't start) and won 5 championships. That's truly insane even though he had a great team and a great coach.

Magic is better offensively when it comes to things like dribbling, setting up others, court vision, intangibles, etc but LeBron is better defensively almost across the board, quicker, high flier & more athletic. When it's all said and done, I have no doubt LeBron will pass Magic. It's Jordan and Kareem I'm not sure about. Kareem was literally a tank and model of insane consistency for 20 years.

True, sometimes you forget just how Great Magic was. He won 5 titles in a 9-year span, no one but Jordan and the early Celtics can claim that. I'd have to compare their total accolades but James will almost definitely go down as the greater of these two. Had Magic never gotten HIV though, he very easily could've been gunning for the GOAT title that MJ has. I just had to be born in 1995 and miss all of it!

Hey 寂しいマグナエクス, @gabistabi, dm, what are your picks?

MJ
Kareem
Russell
Magic
Wilt
LeBron
Bird
Shaq
Duncan
Kobe

It's too hard for me to lump in a bunch of players I've never seen play with players that I have, so


1. Duncan
2. Lebron
3. Shaq

4. Kobe

5. KG
6. Wade
7. Dirk

8. Durant
9. Curry (toss up between Curry, Nash, Iverson, Kidd. Curry already has a ring a two MVPs, he will end up ahead of them anyway.
10. Kidd

That was tougher than an all time list

1-Jordan

2-Wilt

3-Russell

4-Kareem

5-Bran

6-Bird

7-Shaq

8-Hakeem

9-Kobe

10-Magic


Im really close to just bumping Magic out of the top ten. The more I watch him play, the less I can rationalize him being in the top 10. He just didn't play a lick of D, and I feel like I'm lacking evidence he's better than a lot of all time greats who don't sniff the top ten like Barkley or Nash. 
It feels weird putting Bran that high too, but he deserves it at this point just for longevity. I never thought he was quite as great as some of the other guys on the list at his peak (probably most of the guys in the top ten tbh) but he's also been a top 5 player 11 years. Even in the top 10, not many guys are that consistently good. Just the other top 5 guys.

Around 2002 is when I really got into it. I was still really young though. I was way too young in 98 but I do remember the Bulls being a big deal. I missed a lot of Shaq's years but I feel like I've seen enough and know enough to properly gauge him. 

Lebron on the 2003 Spurs not making it past Kobe/Shaq lakers, 5 rings, etc.. He has an argument on Bron. Also Lebron's career isn't even finished yet.

Still beat two top 10 all time players with no other all stars on his team, and had one of the greatest playoff runs of all time. 

Do you have LeBroj in front of Shaq now that the season is over? If not, what does he lack?

Well let me throw a list at you, and if you have any follow-ups I can try to answer:

Kareem
Duncan
Jordan
Garnett
Hakeem
Shaq
LeBron
Robinson
Magic

Not sure who would be 10th, there are a bunch of guys after that point. I don't rank players unless I've seen enough tape on them. Unfortunately for Russell/West and such, that means I won't be able to ever rank them.

Notes:

• I'm very high on longevity and defense compared to most. Portability (ability to carry over impact in different situations) also means a lot. I'm only interested in how well a guy would play in today's league, so this hurts a few guys. It does help a few guys too, but not enough to make a difference on this list. When constructing this list, I put it together in terms of who I would draft, given what I know about their careers, if my goal is to win as much as possible in today's league (basically summing up how much a guy will improve my championship odds for each individual season, across his entire career). Just one other minor note, injuries during the season aren't a huge problem, but during the playoffs, they are often season-breaking. Guys are penalized very heavily if they aren't available in the postseason.

• Magic is an interesting case for me. He is a very unique case, in that I think if he played in today's league, he would have played one or two more years. After the 92 Olympics, he had intended to un-retire, and resume his career. I pencil him in for two more seasons at a bit below his 91 level, at about 70% health (no back-to-backs; here are some articles on the topic). I think the guys playing in the ABA who had to wait a year to resume their careers are similar. If I was ranking Wilt, who originally wanted to play one or two seasons more (but went from NBA->ABA, on top of his contract disputes with the Lakers) it would come up. If I don't give Magic the extra couple seasons, he drops back into the pack.

• Impact metrics are a big part of my evaluation process, as is watching tape. When watching, defensively in particular it's important to see how well a guy can defend in a team concept in a variety of situations. Pick-and-roll offenses weren't as prevalent league wide (for instance during Hakeem's/Robinson's early prime, four teams -- UTA, PHX, CLE, DET -- seemed to use it most frequently) and with illegal defense, there was a lot more man-to-man D than switching, so it's harder to get an idea of how well a big would function in today's game on that end. The playoffs are particularly important because if a guy demonstrates having a weakness that can be exploited over a seven-game series, it's something to take into account (likewise, if a guy's play style is particularly resilient, that's certainly a boon).

Wow, very interesting lists, I'll give a good response when I'm not eating lunch with the family

Id say Larry was better on both sides of the floor, but the gap is bigger on D for sure. Larry's best years are probably a bit better than Lebron's IMO. He also had a very complete game that could fit anywhere.

I used to be pretty high on Bird, and I think in-era he is one of the GOAT offensive players. I actually had him clearly ahead of Magic for awhile, but there were some convincing arguments in this thread I started. I've changed my mind a bit. Last year I posted this a few months later, and it's approximately my current position as well:

It's a difficult sell for me. I don't think Bird warped the floor the same way Dirk/Curry/Shaq did. When I watch more and more tape, I come away more impressed with his passing (especially with such a low time of possession) than I am with his shooting. If he grew up in today's league, he would certainly be encouraged to shoot more often. But I don't think he's going to become an outlier floor-warper, and create opportunities for his teammates at the same rate as the other guys I mentioned. Honestly, he reminds me of a better passing Paul Pierce (with better rebounding and worse defense) than anyone. Both had very versatile offensive games. Neither was super athletic. Both terrific shooters.

Magic was a terrible defender, but it's much, much harder to hide a big than a perimeter player. You don't need to hide Bird early on, but his career basically was his prime, and by the mid/late 80s, anybody with speed is going to be trouble. I do think that Magic does create a glaring need on the defensive end because you need someone small and quick to cover guards, but he functioned pretty well in 90-91 with Dunleavy, who played a bit of a pseudo-zone at times. Today, Bird's position would be the 4 (you'd get murdered trying to play him at the 3), and it's harder to hide someone who will be a liability for half his career on the defensive end, at one of the big positions.

I agree 100%, and I say this as somebody who is a big fan of the vintage NBA. I love watching and collecting old games, and I spent a lot of time helping out the guys on nbastats.net with their projects to find old newspaper articles and box scores for players from the 60s and 70s. I definitely appreciate and respect a lot of what the older legends did.

That being said, I view it as an evolution. The league is clearly trending in one direction, towards skill and mobility. Here's a great quote from Coach Wooden from his book "Practical Modern Basketball":

I think the last line in blue is spot on. The league is moving towards a particular end of the spectrum, so for the sake of comparisons, that's what is valuable to me.

Now that being said, while my top 10 (or top 9, rather) list doesn't reflect it, my list isn't only about penalizing players from the past. Some guys, when playing today, would have some advantages in terms of improved medicine/training, more favorable play style suiting their game, different rules. Some of the PGs from the 80s/90s (KJ, Stockton, Thomas, Price), would be better appreciated today, and with some of the different hand-checking rules, would have more freedom offensively. In addition to the bigs I mentioned, from watching more of Parish, I think he has underrated mobility, and while he was an impact player in his day, he would be viewed even better today with his rainbow jumper.

But projecting players from today into the past doesn't make much sense to me. The past was an incomplete game, and the league (based on rule changes and such) is clearly moving away from what it once was, more towards Wooden's ideal. Maybe I'm a bit biased, since IMO that type of basketball is more aesthetically pleasing.