# Are there G.O.A.T.s in football? **URL:** \ **Category:** The Game Room\ **Created:** [September 24, 2009, 11:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-g-o-a-t-s-in-football/511430 "2009-09-24T23:09:10Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Snarky\_Kong](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a183cd/32.png) [@Snarky\_Kong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snarky_Kong)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2009, 3:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-g-o-a-t-s-in-football/511430/81 "2009-09-27T03:08:15Z")
Jordan never had any lackluster years at the end of his career either… ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2009, 3:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-g-o-a-t-s-in-football/511430/82 "2009-09-27T03:29:12Z")
> [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](#): > > **Waldo** I don’t think that the point-for-point statistical argument is really the best method of comparing the two players at all, really. So I didn’t mean to say “Jordan outscored Wilt by a quarter of a PPG, QED.” I was just pointing out that using Wilt’s one-year scoring average won’t get it done when Jordan outscored Wilt for their careers. > > I think that a fair evaluation of Jordan vs. Wilt goes like this: > > The first point, which you need to really deal with before you move beyond it to any other arguments, is that Jordan won six titles, and was the unquestioned star of his team and the league each of those years. It can fairly be said that Jordan personally _won_ those titles as much as any team sport player has ever won a title. His early career arc took him deeper and deeper into the playoffs year by year, then he finally won a championship, and from that point on, basically, when he played, he won the championship, and when he didn’t play (94-95), somebody else won the championship and his old team was only decent. Wilt won two titles - once as the unquestionable star of his team, averaging like 25 and 25, and once as a 35 year old when he was less of an offensive option and more of a defender/rebounder for two Hall of Fame guards in their primes (a supporting-old-man role he shared in the regular season with also-decrepit Elgin Baylor, so I mean, that was a pretty good team). > > Shorthand for the above: > Jordan, 5 MVPs, 6 rings, and 6 (S I X!) Finals MVPs. > Wilt, 4 MVPs, a couple rings, and a Finals MVP (which he won in '71, and they didn’t give one out in '67, so you could credit him with two, but if he had won the first maybe they wouldn’t have given him the second one, which was a lot tougher call… but anyway). > > So already, in my opinion, Jordan has a huge head start. There’s the Bill Russell problem for Wilt, which has been mentioned already, but I’m inclined to say it isn’t such an immediate disqualifier for him because honestly, those Celtics teams were fucking ridiculous, and Wilt was getting like 30 and 30 every time they played them, so what do you want him to do? Of course, it doesn’t have to be much of a tarnish to put him underneath a guy who literally was never beaten once he was on top, unless you count his re-un-retirement. > > The second major thing I think you have to look at is that, and I’m trying to be tactful here, but subjectively speaking, they played some watered-down basketball in Wilt’s day. I mean, [seriously](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ucfpGWfhDU). And look - I’m a big advocate of the approach that doesn’t hold a player’s era against him, so I’m not inclined to just say that since Shaq or Dwight Howard or Hakeem would eat his lunch, he should just be dismissed. > > I am inclined to say, though, that, all things considered, Wilt Chamberlain catching the ball, back to the basket, six feet from the rim, and not even making a move before finger rolling over a six-five guy and getting a foul called (which foul shot he would then miss six out of ten times) (or getting blocked repeatedly by Bill Russell and following his own miss because nobody else comes up to his elbows or even bothers to enter the lane, much less double down on him hard), just isn’t that subjectively and contextually appealing as what Jordan did. It wasn’t his fault how tall everyone else was or how aesthetically ridiculous the game still was 50 years ago, and certainly he was an unbelievable outlier athletically, but just off the top of your head, Jordan played in the playoffs against Bird, Isaiah, Stockton and Malone, Barkley, Shaq and Penny, Kemp and Payton, Dominique, Drexler, and Ewing. It was much harder to be dominant in the 90s, in my opinion, because there were so many more great players. > > Those are the two big points, I think. Then you can look at stats, where Wilt is as impressive as anybody in any sport except Gretzky, probably, or maybe Barry Bonds. I just don’t really think the stats outweigh the other stuff. So if he is singlehandedly the reason they won the championships, is he equally responsible for the first 7 years of not winning? How did he suddenly become a winner, when he was so good, he always should have won. It helped that he got the “Jordan Rules”. He could take steps and got all foul calls. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2009, 3:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-g-o-a-t-s-in-football/511430/83 "2009-09-27T03:37:42Z")
Wilt got that treatment too. All superstars do, including many of the ones Jordan played against. ---
**Author:** ![Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy_Chitwood)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2009, 4:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-g-o-a-t-s-in-football/511430/84 "2009-09-27T04:35:04Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > And that’s the other part of the math: if we start arguing that Jordan’s 5 MVPs and 6 rings make up a master stat, then _ **he’s** _ of course surpassed on MVPs-and-rings by Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, who scored more points than Jordan while racking up more rebounds than anyone not named Russell or Chamberlain – and, of course, that’s why there’d be a “Bill Russell problem” for Jordan as well, since _ **he** _ surpasses Jordan on the MVPs-and-rings metric likewise, and edges him out in this or that category to boot. The Bill Russell problem is that during Wilt’s career, there was a player who more or less played his position and whose team was better than Wilt’s almost every year. The Bill Russell problem is that all those championships Wilt wasn’t winning, Bill Russell was. No such problem for Jordan, since he started winning and kept winning. > [@](#): > > So we won’t use that as the master stat – not if we start off with the assumption that Jordan is the best and want to hunt for a metric that’ll favor him against all comers: we can say _points-per-game average in a career_ is the master stat, since he never cracked the top five for points-per-game in a season but didn’t have a bad year at the end; Wilt’s got _ **four** _ of the top five, but we can disregard those upon noting that he threw off his career average with a bad last year upon playing one year longer than Jordan did. Are you being serious? “Master stat,” “hunt for a metric?” I think I made a clear argument that pretty much disregarded statistics entirely, which I didn’t have to do, since Jordan is at least in the top 3 players just based on statistical flash. It’s ridiculous that you’d paint a picture of me desperately sifting through stats in order to come up with some arcane method to show that Michael fucking Jordan is the greatest player of all time, when the first sentence of my post was about how I wasn’t really interested in comparing stat for stat. > [@](#): > > Jordan never led the league in rebounds; Wilt did; we’ll disregard that, as it wasn’t really in Jordan’s job description. Jordan never led the league in assists; Wilt did; we’ll disregard that, ditto. Jordan leads Wilt in career average by five-one-hundredths of a point thanks to Wilt’s lackluster extra year there at the end? We could run with that, sure. OK… I really don’t understand the sarcastic tone here. You quoted me saying that points per game, career, wasn’t supposed to be some kind of trump card, and then going on at length about why Jordan’s the best without referencing points per game once. Now you’re hammering away at the Bizarro version of that statement. But OK, let’s play your game. Here are some other players who, like Wilt, led the league in rebounds: Dennis Rodman x 7, Ben Wallace x 2, Dikembe Mutombo x 2, Michael Cage, Bill Laimbeer, Swen Nater, Truck Robinson. How many of them are worth mentioning? How much are those rebounding titles worth in their favor in an evaluation of the _greatest player of all time?_ Rebounds just aren’t doing it for me, I’ll be honest. I consider them a direct function of the minutes he played combined with the fact that he was playing with a bunch of guys eight inches shorter than he was and the fact that he played every minute of every game because he never fouled anybody. I’m sorry, but yeah, I’m waving my hand at his rebounding totals in a discussion of greatest player of all time. It’s just not that valuable. Hell, if I was disregarding the fluffy stats completely, I’d just say, Wilt never won shit, had no post moves, and could barely dribble the ball, so Jordan’s better. It’s true, though, none of those other stiffs ever led the league in assists. Wilt’s is far and away the most ridiculous stat sheet ever assembled. No argument there. By the way, Wilt Chamberlain’s final 5 full seasons’ worth of scoring averages: 20.5, 27.3, 20.7, 14.8, 13.2. Not exactly a long string of throwing up 30 points year after year interrupted by a fall off a cliff in that “lackluster last year.” > [@](#): > > Well, it’s a little easier if you’ve got Scottie Pippen on your side; the expanding talent pool works both ways, after all. Wilt played with Billy Cunningham, Hal Greer, Paul Arizin, Tom Gola, Guy Rodgers, Elgin Baylor, Jerry West, Happy Hairston, and Gail Goodrich at various points in his career, though. Pippen was a great player, but he was one great player, and he wasn’t Jerry West. > [@](#): > > Still, yes, we could make out the argument that Jordan in his prime would beat Wilt in his prime if each is partnered with an equally-talented team; it’s the sort of argument that Montana-v-Marino usually comes down to. I’d hope that would be accepted as a given, since Wilt didn’t even win in his own era, when he didn’t have to worry about Michael Jordan. Dozens of players in the 90s had teams of equal talent to Jordan’s, and none of them beat him. Plenty of teams beat Wilt’s very talented teams. That, combined with the fact that Wilt actually wasn’t that good at basketball, while Jordan was ridiculously good, its what matters to me. > [@](#): > > But at that point, stats go out the window as the speculation starts in earnest; it comes down to what you said about how _“you can look at stats, where Wilt is as impressive as anybody in any sport except Gretzky, probably, or maybe Barry Bonds. I just don’t really think the stats outweigh the other stuff.”_ I think the “other stuff” – the era-to-era comparison – pretty much _ **has** _ to swallow up the stats entirely to make the GOAT point in question. Again, the era to era comparison isn’t the entirety of the other stuff. If Wilt won five titles in a row, I would be forced to admit (not really forced, in fact; I’d be overjoyed, since I hated every minute of Jordan’s career) that because of the differing eras, Wilt has to be considered right there next to Jordan, even if he was basically doing a tip drill surrounded by a bunch of accountants half the games in his career. And the other half of the games, he was just doing a tip drill and sharing the tips with one other guy, and losing. But, anyway, really? I mean, even for there to be an argument that the guy who invented a few dozen offensive attacks, entirely revolutionized guard play, scored more points per game than anyone in history, was the best offensive and defensive player in the league more years than he wasn’t, and won every NBA Finals that was contested while he was an active player for a like eight year period was the best player of all time? All because Wilt averaged 50 points a game, and led the league in rebounds, and led the league in total assists one year, even though he couldn’t manage to win a title? It’s not like there aren’t really accessible metrics that put Jordan ahead of Wilt anyway, so I don’t see how the stats so desperately need to be neutralized somehow - Jordan’s #1 all-time in PER, for instance, and is way ahead of Wilt in other advanced ratings, especially defensively. And seriously, taking the stats on their face… if you’re only going to shoot 54% from the field, it’s pretty damning that you can only manage 51% from the line. 54% is kind of on the anemic side for a center even if he’s playing with other grown men – without any kind of era-adjustment. Maybe that’s how he got all those rebounds. All of which, again, isn’t to say that Wilt isn’t very impressive, statistically. It just doesn’t take much to knock you off of the #1 spot all-time, and honestly, there’s a candidate out there who pretty much doesn’t have any flaws at all. Aside from\* that\*, though, I don’t see any reason why the era comparison shouldn’t swallow up the stats even if it _does_ need to. We don’t say that Hugh Duffy is the greatest hitter of all time because he hit .440 one year, because he was barely playing baseball as we know it today. We’re allowed to say, you know what, I’m docking points because that just wasn’t that hard to do. When I see video of the guy finger rolling from eight feet away from the basket, and not only is he not getting doubled, and not only is he not getting bumped, the guy guarding him isn’t even really contesting the shot because he can’t get off the floor, I’m just not willing to pee all over myself because he scored 50 points. Keon Clark would throw Wilt Chamberlain’s shit all night long. I’m not saying that because I think it means Keon Clark is better than Wilt, I’m just saying come on, you know? Come _on_. Honestly, it wouldn’t have mattered if Wilt scored 90 points a game. He might as well have. Why is it that he could only manage the two titles even though most teams were fielding lineups with one or two guys over six foot eight, if that? It’s not like the NBA game isn’t one that’s historically dominated by individuals. The NBA is the one sport where “never won the big one” is pretty meaningful. ---
**Author:** ![Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy_Chitwood)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2009, 4:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-g-o-a-t-s-in-football/511430/85 "2009-09-27T04:36:15Z")
> [@gonzomax](#): > > So if he is singlehandedly the reason they won the championships, is he equally responsible for the first 7 years of not winning? How did he suddenly become a winner, when he was so good, he always should have won. > It helped that he got the “Jordan Rules”. He could take steps and got all foul calls. I thought you were from Detroit. You don’t even know what “The Jordan Rules” refers to? What a silly post. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2009, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-g-o-a-t-s-in-football/511430/86 "2009-09-27T16:20:43Z")
> [@](#): > > Still, yes, we could make out the argument that Jordan in his prime would beat Wilt in his prime if each is partnered with an equally-talented team; it’s the sort of argument that Montana-v-Marino usually comes down to. The Montana v. Marino argument _can’t_ be boiled down to what they would have done with equally talented teams, because it couldn’t have happened. Marino repeatedly torpedoed plans to draft running backs in the first round (or, later on, to spend big free agent dollars on them) in order to make sure the Dolphins remained a passing team. In essence, he was directly responsible for his own supporting cast. Montana, on the other hand, had no such ego issues, so he had Roger Craig. Marino’s fault, ultimately. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2009, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-g-o-a-t-s-in-football/511430/87 "2009-09-27T17:31:42Z")
> [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](#): > > I thought you were from Detroit. You don’t even know what “The Jordan Rules” refers to? > > What a silly post. Jordan was allowed to walk and got endless foul calls. They stopped teams from defending him. Those are Jordan Rules. The concept is so entrenched that when Wade and Miami played the Pistons a coupkle years ago, critics said Wade was enjoying Jordan rules. The NBA decided that its popularity was riding Jordans back . They figured he made billions for them. They are attempting to relive it by giving some players special breaks. Basketball is the only sport where they speak openly of “earning breaks” A young player goes aggressively to the net and the commentators say, he hasn’t earned that call yet.. ---
**Author:** ![Snarky\_Kong](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a183cd/32.png) [@Snarky\_Kong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snarky_Kong)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2009, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-g-o-a-t-s-in-football/511430/88 "2009-09-27T17:38:57Z")
> [@gonzomax](#): > > Jordan was allowed to walk and got endless foul calls. They stopped teams from defending him. Those are Jordan Rules. > The concept is so entrenched that when Wade and Miami played the Pistons a coupkle years ago, critics said Wade was enjoying Jordan rules. The NBA decided that its popularity was riding Jordans back . They figured he made billions for them. They are attempting to relive it by giving some players special breaks. Basketball is the only sport where they speak openly of “earning breaks” A young player goes aggressively to the net and the commentators say, he hasn’t earned that call yet.. > **[Jordan Rules](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordan_Rules)** > > The Jordan Rules was a basketball tactic employed by the Detroit Pistons of the National Basketball Association to limit scoring by the Chicago Bulls' Michael Jordan. > After the Chicago Bulls’ Michael Jordan scored 59 points against the Detroit Pistons in a game in April 1988, Pistons coach Chuck Daly and his assistants, Ron Rothstein and Dick Versace, devised a strategy "to play him tough, to physically challenge him and to vary its defenses so as to try to throw him off balance." Key players... ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2009, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-g-o-a-t-s-in-football/511430/89 "2009-09-27T18:49:59Z")
> [@Snarky\_Kong](#): > > [Jordan Rules - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordan_Rules) I am familiar with the Rodman inspired defense. That was long ago . When we discuss Jordan rules nowadays ,it refers to LaBron crabwalks and Wade phantom fouls. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2009, 3:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-g-o-a-t-s-in-football/511430/90 "2009-09-28T03:24:50Z")
> [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](#): > > The Bill Russell problem is that during Wilt’s career, there was a player who more or less played his position and whose team was better than Wilt’s almost every year. But note the subtle shift: there (a) was a _ **player** _ who more or less played his position, and (b) whose _ **team** _ was better than Wilt’s team. You work the same quick slide a little later: _“Dozens of players in the 90s had teams of equal talent to Jordan’s, and none of them beat him.”_ Who wins, team-to-team: Russell’s team, or Chamberlain’s? Who wins, man-to-man: Russell or Chamberlain? > [@](#): > > The Bill Russell problem is that all those championships Wilt wasn’t winning, Bill Russell was. There’s that shift again. Russell’s team beat Wilt’s team. > [@](#): > > Pippen was a great player, but he was one great player So should we only throw out the games where Pippen got the ball from Dennis _“leading the league in rebounds”_ Rodman and Jordan was open because guys were busy covering Steve _“the most accurate three-point shooter in NBA history”_ Kerr? > [@](#): > > Are you being serious? “Master stat,” “hunt for a metric?” I think I made a clear argument that pretty much disregarded statistics entirely, which I didn’t have to do, since Jordan is at least in the top 3 players just based on statistical flash. Just so we’re on the same page: who _ **do** _ you consider to be the top 3 players _“just based on statistical flash,”_ exactly? Jordan’s not in the top 3 for field goals, he’s not in the top 3 for rebounds, he’s not in the top 3 for assists; it’d be fine to disregard statistics – but so long as you’re going to regard 'em later in the same sentence, just mention which statistics “flash” best. > [@](#): > > You quoted me saying that points per game, career, wasn’t supposed to be some kind of trump card, and then going on at length about why Jordan’s the best without referencing points per game once. Now you’re hammering away at the Bizarro version of that statement. But OK, let’s play your game. Here are some other players who, like Wilt, led the league in rebounds: Dennis Rodman x 7, Ben Wallace x 2, Dikembe Mutombo x 2, Michael Cage, Bill Laimbeer, Swen Nater, Truck Robinson. How many of them are worth mentioning? How much are those rebounding titles worth in their favor in an evaluation of the _greatest player of all time?_ Rebounds just aren’t doing it for me, I’ll be honest. No, rebounds don’t do it for me either. Not in their own right. What makes a top rebounder valuable is that he can get the ball to a guy who can score points with it. Rodman leading the league in rebounds was a valuable way to supply Jordan; Wilt leading the league in rebounds was a valuable way to supply Wilt. Wilt led the league in rebounds x 5 _ **while** _ leading the league in points x 5; there were also seasons when he’d lead the league in points while only being the second-place rebounder, but that’s still pretty good. Rebounds keep the ball out of the other side’s hands while setting up chances for your side; they’re a big help if you’ve got a Jordan who can capitalize on 'em, or if you’re a Wilt and can capitalize on 'em yourself. > [@](#): > > I’m sorry, but yeah, I’m waving my hand at his rebounding totals in a discussion of greatest player of all time. It’s just not that valuable. Hell, if I was disregarding the fluffy stats completely, I’d just say, Wilt never won shit, had no… Now hold on a moment, there; is that just a rhetorical flourish, or do you honestly not know that Wilt has multiple rings? > [@](#): > > It’s not like the NBA game isn’t one that’s historically dominated by individuals. The NBA is the one sport where “never won the big one” is pretty meaningful. Huh. It’s almost as if you _ **don’t** _ know he’s got multiple rings. For the record, he’s got multiple rings; he’s not the guy who “never won the big one,” he’s the guy who repeatedly won the big one. > [@](#): > > By the way, Wilt Chamberlain’s final 5 full seasons’ worth of scoring averages: 20.5, 27.3, 20.7, 14.8, 13.2. Not exactly a long string of throwing up 30 points year after year interrupted by a fall off a cliff in that “lackluster last year.” I’m not sure what that proves about my point; he had a _ **number** _ of lackluster years there at the end, and yet _ **still** _ would’ve eclipsed Jordan if he’d called it quits after as few years as Jordan. Despite his lackluster final years, his average is better than anyone but Jordan’s – and his average would be better than Jordan’s if he hadn’t stuck around for one season longer. But what could he do? His team still needed a guy who could lead the league in rebounds that year, so he suited up and traded output for accuracy by setting the all-time record for single-season field-goal percentage. (Who’s in second place? Well, > [@](#): > > All because Wilt averaged 50 points a game, and led the league in rebounds, and led the league in total assists one year, even though he couldn’t manage to win a title? Only in that he led the league in assists (and rebounds and field-goal percentage) the year _ **after** _ he’d won a title by leading the league in rebounds while leading the league in field-goal percentage; his accuracy that year is still the all-time _ **second-best** _ percentage, surpassed, of course, only by Wilt himself.) > [@](#): > > It’s not like there aren’t really accessible metrics that put Jordan ahead of Wilt anyway, so I don’t see how the stats so desperately need to be neutralized somehow - Jordan’s #1 all-time in PER, for instance, Yes, we could cherry-pick that one: both Jordan and Wilt led the league in PER for seven consecutive seasons – with Wilt racking up the #1 all-time single-season PER, but then dropping off more in their later years than Jordan did. Wilt, of course, had one _ **more** _ of those later years, but that’s how it goes, sometimes. > [@](#): > > And seriously, taking the stats on their face… if you’re only going to shoot 54% from the field, it’s pretty damning that you can only manage 51% from the line. I’m not sure I follow you; who _ **cares** _ where he got the results from, so long as he got the results? Heck, he once ran up the numbers by leading the league in _ **free throws;** _ he’d led the league in field-goal percentage the year before, and did so again the year after, but all three involved leading the league in _ **points** _ as surely as leading the league in rebounds, because the points are what he cared about and he didn’t much care where he racked 'em up. ---
**Author:** ![Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy_Chitwood)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2009, 4:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-g-o-a-t-s-in-football/511430/91 "2009-09-28T04:44:20Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > But note the subtle shift: there (a) was a _ **player** _ who more or less played his position, and (b) whose _ **team** _ was better than Wilt’s team. You work the same quick slide a little later: _“Dozens of players in the 90s had teams of equal talent to Jordan’s, and none of them beat him.”_ > > Who wins, team-to-team: Russell’s team, or Chamberlain’s? Who wins, man-to-man: Russell or Chamberlain? > > There’s that shift again. Russell’s team beat Wilt’s team. It’s not intended to be a misdirection, nor do I think it’s fair to treat it as such. The NBA is a team sport, obviously. We’re comparing individuals. It’s just synechdoche – the “Bill Russell problem” is that there was a team – Bill Russell’s team – that kept winning championships year after year, and they kept beating Wilt’s team to do so. If I was inclined to be unfair about it, I might say, well, Wilt can’t be the greatest, because if he was the greatest he would’ve found a way to win more, instead of one title in his prime, and one more when he was a diminished player. But I’m not saying that. I don’t know what it profits you to pretend you don’t see why it’s a reflection on a player when one’s team repeatedly beats the other’s. You understand, I’m sure, that I didn’t say “Bill Russell problem” because of Bill Russell as an individual, but because Bill Russell is a convenient shorthand for “the teams that actually won NBA titles year after year during Wilt’s career, the way Jordan’s teams did during his career,” since Wilt conveniently lost to a team for which Bill Russell played every year. Shorthand, see? As I said, winning a game or a championship is a reflection on an individual’s career a thousandfold more accurately in basketball than in any other sport. Therefore, the Bill Russell problem: Wilt didn’t win that much when analyzed in the rarefied air around the exalted company we’re talking about. If Wilt kept losing to a different team every year in the playoffs, he wouldn’t have had a Bill Russell problem. If it makes my point clearer, we can take the Celtics out of it entirely, and I can just say that two championships for Wilt isn’t that impressive, but I don’t think that works to your advantage. I acknowledged way upthread that I’m not willing to just write Wilt off entirely because of the fact that he got so thoroughly whipped year after year, because those Celtics teams were incredible. It still counts against him, though. > [@](#): > > So should we only throw out the games where Pippen got the ball from Dennis _“leading the league in rebounds”_ Rodman and Jordan was open because guys were busy covering Steve _“the most accurate three-point shooter in NBA history”_ Kerr? It’s true; the Bulls dynasty wasn’t full of players who tripped all over themselves on the way to the court. I’m not sure what your point is, though. I said it was much harder to win an NBA championship in the 90s than in the 60s, much less six. I pointed out the caliber of player that Jordan competed against. Are you saying that Dennis Rodman and Steve Kerr gave Jordan a better chance against the 90s competition than Tom Gola and Billy Cunningham and Jerry West et al gave Wilt in his day? That Jordan’s teammates stood out even in the era of expanded talent? Was Steve Kerr a great player in the context we’re dealing with in this discussion? Since you cut out the part of the quote where I made clear that Jerry freaking West is the guy we’re comparing to, I feel like suddenly we’re having a very different discussion. (But the notion that anyone, ever, left Michael Jordan open to get out on Steve Kerr is a serious blemish on your record, it must be said). Otherwise, I mean, yeah, there were some good defenders and spot-up shooters on Jordan’s teams. Doesn’t mean any other player in the history of the league could have filled Jordan’s shoes and won six rings. > [@](#): > > Just so we’re on the same page: who _ **do** _ you consider to be the top 3 players _“just based on statistical flash,”_ exactly? Jordan’s not in the top 3 for field goals, he’s not in the top 3 for rebounds, he’s not in the top 3 for assists; it’d be fine to disregard statistics – but so long as you’re going to regard 'em later in the same sentence, just mention which statistics “flash” best. Again, I feel like there’s some kind of mock confusion going on here. I’m saying Jordan was statistically very good, but that it was unfair of you to say I was “hunting for a master stat,” by pointing out his scoring average, since I wasn’t really leaning heavily on the numbers – I was arguing wins. It is not inconsistent for me to respond to your, I felt, misguided accusation by pointing out that 1. I wasn’t cherrypicking any numbers and 2. that it wouldn’t be the kind of silly sleight of hand you made it out to be if I _had_ been leaning on numbers. We can disregard stats, or we can regard stats. Either way, I don’t have to just ignore the fact that you misrepresented what I was saying, right? Jordan’s the best because he won way more when it was harder to win, and because basketball was so much more advanced when he played. As an entirely separate issue, I object to the idea that one would need to filter through the stat book and throw out nearly every reasonable metric to arrive at a defensible conclusion that Jordan’s the greatest. > [@](#): > > Now hold on a moment, there; is that just a rhetorical flourish, or do you honestly not know that Wilt has multiple rings? > > Huh. It’s almost as if you _ **don’t** _ know he’s got multiple rings. > > For the record, he’s got multiple rings; he’s not the guy who “never won the big one,” he’s the guy who repeatedly won the big one. Right, I know. I acknowledged it. It was rhetorical flourish. Again, I think the greatest player of all time needs to win more than one in the 60s and one in the 70s. Hence my diminution of his achievements. > [@](#): > > I’m not sure what that proves about my point; he had a _ **number** _ of lackluster years there at the end, and yet _ **still** _ would’ve eclipsed Jordan if he’d called it quits after as few years as Jordan. Despite his lackluster final years, his average is better than anyone but Jordan’s – and his average would be better than Jordan’s if he hadn’t stuck around for one season longer. > > But what could he do? His team still needed a guy who could lead the league in rebounds that year, so he suited up and traded output for accuracy by setting the all-time record for single-season field-goal percentage. Yes, his production was incredible, and it speaks volumes about him that his game changed the way it did over his career. He was an incredible player, and many less-able players were less willing to adapt the way he did. All I was saying was that, over the course of their careers, Jordan outscored him fair and square. It wasn’t a case of one really horrible, obviously off-peak year that threw the numbers entirely out of whack, which I felt you were suggesting. > [@](#): > > Only in that he led the league in assists (and rebounds and field-goal percentage) the year _ **after** _ he’d won a title by leading the league in rebounds while leading the league in field-goal percentage; his accuracy that year is still the all-time _ **second-best** _ percentage, surpassed, of course, only by Wilt himself.) > > Yes, we could cherry-pick that one: both Jordan and Wilt led the league in PER for seven consecutive seasons – with Wilt racking up the #1 all-time single-season PER, but then dropping off more in their later years than Jordan did. Wilt, of course, had one _ **more** _ of those later years, but that’s how it goes, sometimes. Yep. He certainly deserves mention as one of the very few greatest of all time. I was still making the point that the numbers don’t need to be misrepresented to support the Jordan as GOAT camp, in response to your assertion to the contrary. > [@](#): > > I’m not sure I follow you; who _ **cares** _ where he got the results from, so long as he got the results? Heck, he once ran up the numbers by leading the league in _ **free throws;** _ he’d led the league in field-goal percentage the year before, and did so again the year after, but all three involved leading the league in _ **points** _ as surely as leading the league in rebounds, because the points are what he cared about and he didn’t much care where he racked 'em up. I, predictably, don’t get where the confusion comes from – 54% and 51% are low numbers, which are bad. That means a lot of wasted possessions. Missing shots hurts your team. A guy who misses half of his free throws is a serious liability to his team in that regard. I’m sure you’re familiar with the backhanded compliment “volume scorer.” If you shoot more, you score more. But it takes a little of the shine off when you’re so inefficient about it. And it means you don’t win as many games, or championships. Maybe he wins a few more championships if he converts those opportunities, I don’t know. Incidentally, speaking of volume, it’s maybe worth pointing out that there were a lot more points scored, a lot more possessions, and a lot more shots taken and missed in Wilt’s era than in Jordan’s. A point or a rebound in 1965 doesn’t necessarily translate to a point or rebound in 1997; another reason the stats in this case need to be held at arms’ length, at least in my view. I intend my argument to be a really simple one. Jordan is the greatest because of all his rings, and the fact that he was the reason his team won the rings, and the way in which he was the reason his team won the rings, and the fact that he played in a super-competitive era which was less susceptible to pure physical domination. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2009, 11:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-g-o-a-t-s-in-football/511430/92 "2009-09-28T11:34:16Z")
> [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](#): > > All I was saying was that, over the course of their careers, Jordan outscored him fair and square > [@](#): > > I intend my argument to be a really simple one. Jordan is the greatest because of all his rings, and the fact that he was the reason his team won the rings, and the way in which he was the reason his team won the rings, and the fact that he played in a super-competitive era which was less susceptible to pure physical domination. Do you mean that Jordan is the greatest because of all his rings, or that he’s greater than Wilt because of those rings? Because you presumably wouldn’t be talking up the _“Jordan outscored him fair and square … Jordan is the greatest because of all his rings, and the way in which he was the reason his team won the rings”_ metric if we were talking about Kareem Abdul-Jabbar; Kareem, who outscored Jordan fair and square, got just as many rings but was judged the MVP every time – and was known, à la Wilt, to lead the league in rebounds while leading the league in field-goal percentage so he could lead the league in PER. (He led the league in PER for more seasons than Jordan did, but so did Wilt, so that’s a wash.) Oh, there are ways to make the case that Jordan was greater than Kareem: prizing steals over blocks, prizing free throws over field goals, whatever. But is there a stat we can point to – be it rings or points or both whatever – if we’re talking about two _ **other** _ players, two different players _ **entirely,** _ and we (a) don’t already know which one outdoes the other on what, so we (b) need a ready metric for comparison? > [@](#): > > I’m sure you’re familiar with the backhanded compliment “volume scorer.” If you shoot more, you score more. But it takes a little of the shine off when you’re so inefficient about it. Wilt, like Kareem, has a better career field-goal _ **percentage** _ than Jordan; Jordan leads both of 'em in field-goal attempts, but they both lead him in field-goal _ **scoring,** _ because they were so much more efficient. ---
**Author:** ![Superhal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b4bc9f/32.png) [@Superhal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Superhal)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2009, 12:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-g-o-a-t-s-in-football/511430/93 "2009-09-28T12:12:41Z")
re: Ruth vs Gehrig: I should have checked my facts, but my argument still stands: they benefitted from having each other (as Ruth admitted he couldn’t have hit the 60 if Lou wasn’t there) and thus disqualify both from being GOAT’s. I would nominate Ted Williams, Rogers Hornsby, and Ty Cobb for GOAT’s in baseball hitting, but Cy Young still stands head and shoulders above anyone in pitching. Aaron, Bonds, or even Ichiro would give those three a run for their money. Re: Jordan vs Wilt or Russell: I can give the point that Jordan’s Bulls may not have beaten Russell’s Celtics or any Chamberlin team, but if you put them one on one, who would you bet on? Re: Ronnie Lott: I didn’t see him play, but I would put up Rod Woodson, Ed Reed or Troy Polamalu as better safeties. Currently, the Steelers are 1-2 simply (imho) because Troy is injured. But, the purpose of this thread is about football GOATs, and my argument is that they don’t exist. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2009, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-g-o-a-t-s-in-football/511430/94 "2009-09-28T16:18:04Z")
> [@Superhal](#): > > I would nominate Ted Williams, Rogers Hornsby, and Ty Cobb for GOAT’s in baseball hitting, but Cy Young still stands head and shoulders above anyone in pitching. Aaron, Bonds, or even Ichiro would give those three a run for their money. > > Re: Jordan vs Wilt or Russell: I can give the point that Jordan’s Bulls may not have beaten Russell’s Celtics or any Chamberlin team, but if you put them one on one, who would you bet on?.. > > But, the purpose of this thread is about football GOATs, and my argument is that they don’t exist. Right, because they can’t. In most other sports, as your examples show, you can compare people one on one, and even imagine what would happen if they played each other one on one. One on one skills are even central, if not sufficient. But football _can’t_ be played one on one. You can’t even imagine what would happen between two players, except in the minority of cases where their positions do involve one on one skills against each other. ---
**Author:** ![marshmallow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df705f/32.png) [@marshmallow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/marshmallow)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2009, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-g-o-a-t-s-in-football/511430/95 "2009-09-28T16:44:39Z")
I am a basketball nerd. Jordan is most definitely the consensus GOAT, both from a career perspective (league accolades, titles) and an individual dominance perspective (on court production, making good defenders look bad, playoff heroics, etc.). People were calling him the GOAT before his first retirement. The second threepeat was veering into stuff that would make for a really bad Hollywood sports movie. Whether he is deserving of this acclamation or not can of course lead to fun discussion, but he is the most obvious choice. You can make cases for Kareem and Wilt. Then _maybe_ Magic or Bird (maybe if Bird never had those horrible injuries), but not really those two. I’d stick with arguing for the big men, especially when considering big vs. small defensive impact. Sure, Jordan can shut down Isiah or Drexler or even a team’s outside passing (Shaq or Ewing can’t do much if they don’t get a proper post pass), but a big guy like Kareem (or even Dwight) can shut down the entire paint for an _entire team._ Then again, it’s a lot easier for perimeter players to take over down the stretch of crucial games because they control the ball (or can get it much more easily than a big). And Jordan did that better than pretty much anyone, maybe tied with Bird. So there’s definitely some tradeoffs here. It certainly helps Jordan’s image that he was the most entertaining player ever. Hence the gaudy ratings numbers the NBA has been trying to replicate ever since with perimeter friendly rules. Aside from Jordan, Kareem is the clear cut GOAT (and he was, until somewhere in the early '90s), and if you wanted to pick Kareem first in an all time draft no one would criticize you. Unfortunately for Kareem he was on some really bad teams during his prime in the '70s. He could easily have 10+ titles if he was on the right team. The fact he has 6 as is, including a Finals MVP at such an advanced age, is downright spectacular. The only problem is that he, like many others, had some upsets during his career arc where he was outplayed by others at his position (Walton, Moses) or he played poorly and his team was upset (Houston! We wanted to see Walton vs. Kareem, the Revenge, and you messed it up). Jordan is easily the best playoff performer ever, especially during his peak in the late '80s/early '90s. Boston homers submit Russell. He was an all time rebounder and defender, good passer, very intelligent. Very little offensive game though, disgustingly low efficiency, and the idea that he is individually as good as Wilt is insane. I’d take Hakeem or KG or Duncan and many others over him. > [@Cisco](#): > > As DtC pointed out, the guys before him were playing in a whole different era of competition. Have you seen those charts of basketball player height over the years? Wilt and Russell were playing against dwarfs. This is a popular notion but it’s not true. There are no such charts either. One can certainly argue that that '60s basketball was inferior to the post merger NBA (e.g. perimeter play in general was appalling) but it will have to involve something other than the size of players. It also doesn’t really matter, because Wilt would be the best player in the NBA right now. Shaq was Wilt in the modern day era, right down to the horrible FT shooting. As an aside, the importance of height is exaggerated by casual followers. For example, the most dominant rebounders of the modern era are Rodman, Barkley, and Wallace, all way undersized, theoretically. Plus the current day game revolves around face up guard play and big men in general are kinda eh right now. And NBA heights are a ball of lies anyway, even if they were the be all end all. Magic wasn’t 6’9 and neither is LeBron. Actual 7 footers are pretty rare. Hakeem, Duncan, Ewing, KG…these guys are like 6’9-6’10 and have perfect body types. You don’t want to be much taller than that (see Yao). ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2009, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-g-o-a-t-s-in-football/511430/96 "2009-09-28T17:01:19Z")
> [@marshmallow](#): > > Unfortunately for Kareem he was on some really bad teams during his prime in the '70s. He could easily have 10+ titles if he was on the right team. Part of being a great player is making your \*teammates \*better. Jordan did that, so did Bird, but Kareem? He ws notable for consistently staying back in the paint after a rebound while his mates went down and tried to score 4 on 5. > [@](#): > > The only problem is that he, like many others, had some upsets during his career arc where he was outplayed by others at his position (Walton, Moses) or he played poorly and his team was upset Another part of being a great player is performing at your best when it matters the most. Your own examples argue against Kareem. > [@](#): > > Boston homers submit Russell. He was an all time rebounder and defender, good passer, very intelligent. Very little offensive game though, disgustingly low efficiency, and the idea that he is individually as good as Wilt is insane. Taking the last point first, who dominated whom one on one in all of those Finals series? It isn’t homerism to point that out, it’s apologism for claiming it doesn’t matter. Wilt wasn’t even the best center of his own time; how could he be the best player of all time? But there’s no serious argument to be made against Jordan. Even Bird admits it. ---
**Author:** ![Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy_Chitwood)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2009, 6:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-g-o-a-t-s-in-football/511430/97 "2009-09-28T18:26:14Z")
> [@marshmallow](#): > > This is a popular notion but it’s not true. There are no such charts either. One can certainly argue that that '60s basketball was inferior to the post merger NBA (e.g. perimeter play in general was appalling) but it will have to involve something other than the size of players. It also doesn’t really matter, because Wilt would be the best player in the NBA right now. Shaq was Wilt in the modern day era, right down to the horrible FT shooting. > > As an aside, the importance of height is exaggerated by casual followers. For example, the most dominant rebounders of the modern era are Rodman, Barkley, and Wallace, all way undersized, theoretically. Plus the current day game revolves around face up guard play and big men in general are kinda eh right now. And NBA heights are a ball of lies anyway, even if they were the be all end all. Magic wasn’t 6’9 and neither is LeBron. Actual 7 footers are pretty rare. Hakeem, Duncan, Ewing, KG…these guys are like 6’9-6’10 and have perfect body types. You don’t want to be much taller than that (see Yao). First of all, of _course_ it’s true that players were by and large much shorter 50 years ago. You can see it’s true with even the most rudimentary inspection of the rosters, and especially by looking at who was actually playing the minutes for teams in the 50s and 60s. Pick a team at random from last year, and compare it to a team at random from 50 years ago (I just did it myself, but I could be accused of selecting a non-representative example). Keep doing it until you’re satisfied. Back then, power forwards and centers who were six-six or six-seven were totally normal, and guys above six-nine were relatively rare, and often were stiffs who didn’t play much. Is there even a team in the league now that doesn’t have a 7 footer, and half a dozen over six-nine? Second, the statement that Wilt would be the best player in the NBA right now is utterly ridiculous if taken literally. He wasn’t as objectively good at basketball as Brad Miller. I think you’re severely underestimating the degree to which athletic achievement progresses over time. Shaquille O’Neal would do whatever he wanted to the NBA of 50 years ago, and I mean that literally. He could average 200 points a game if he wanted. Third, Hakeem Olajuwon, Tim Duncan, and Patrick Ewing are not six foot nine, unless Michael Jordan is actually six foot three and nobody ever noticed, because those guys towered over Pippen, and Pippen towered over Jordan. Hell, it’s a fairly well-known fact that Garnett keep their heights listed artificially _low_, not the other way around, because he doesn’t like the idea of being labeled as seven footer. [Garnett’s over seven feet tall](http://cache.20minutes.fr/img/photos/20mn/2007-08/2007-08-01/article_garnett-celtics.jpg), [unless Paul Pierce is four inches shorter than his listed height, and Ray Allen’s under six feet.](http://img.timeinc.net/time/daily/2007/0710/celtics_1029.jpg) And Lebron looks pretty tall [here](http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_MSHM7nBCDEE/SHSXJnqRH6I/AAAAAAAAAJM/XsvJKICsoio/s400/USA_basketball_team.jpg). It isn’t hard to see that either the shorter players in the NBA are actually like five-eight when they claim to be six foot, or the guys who are supposed to be six-eight actually are six-eight. And I played against future NBA players - guards - who were supposed to be six-seven or so, and they were definitely 8-10 inches taller than I am, instead of the four or five that they’d have to be in order for the kind of inflation you’re talking about to exist. ---
**Author:** ![Cisco](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ccd318/32.png) [@Cisco](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cisco)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2009, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-g-o-a-t-s-in-football/511430/98 "2009-09-28T18:38:38Z")
> [@marshmallow](#): > > There are no such charts either. Lol. God, is that you? There was a poster of one hanging on the wall in the doctor’s office I grew up going to. And that’s not the only one I’ve seen. ---
**Author:** ![Tom\_Scud](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/f08c70/32.png) [@Tom\_Scud](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tom_Scud)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2009, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-g-o-a-t-s-in-football/511430/99 "2009-09-28T18:45:12Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > He ws notable for consistently staying back in the paint after a rebound while his mates went down and tried to score 4 on 5. What does that remind me of? [Quote=Kareem Abdul Jabbar in Airplane] LISTEN KID. I’ve been hearing that crap ever since I was at UCLA. I’m out there busting my buns every night. Tell your old man to drag Walton and Lanier up and down the court for 48 minutes. [/quote] ---
**Author:** ![Nars\_Glinley](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nars_glinley/32/8177_2.png) [@Nars\_Glinley](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nars_Glinley)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2009, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-g-o-a-t-s-in-football/511430/100 "2009-09-28T19:16:54Z")
> [@Snarky\_Kong](#): > > Jordan never had any lackluster years at the end of his career either… Are you ignoring his years with the Wizards? Decent numbers to be sure but not Jordanesque. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-g-o-a-t-s-in-football/511430.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-g-o-a-t-s-in-football/511430.md?page=6)