How NBA Rankings Drastically Changed Over Time 

Karl malone at 13 kinda crazy too 💀

He paid for that

@@Noob_Guy2kHe also f’d that…. 👀

@@nestormestizo no way you’re actually supporting a pedo Tim Giannis Dirk and KG all have better arguments for best pf before Pedo Malone get help bruh

@@nestormestizo lmao if you don't know then you don't know. Its okay to be a casual

it really is. It's unfair to them. It's like calling inventors from 1950's and below as idiots because they didn't invent TikTok

He only said that to be polite + he knows most people and players still see him as an undisputed goat. You can't compare eras but you can compare number of rings + stats + dominance + influence and from that perspective mj is clearly greatest to ever play (more than any other guy in other sports at least)

No it doesn't

Unfair because they’re different games, but also unless you were alive for all eras then you can’t comment genuinely because seeing someone’s highlights isn’t enough to rank them again Curry, LeBron etc because you just don’t have a feel for how that player impact the game and the league at the time. It’s always going to be a stupid discussion really

@@darthconquerus agree, seeing highlights is not enough but seeing LBJ in 2011 or Curry in 2016 (not so much but still) crack under pressure is kind of enough to rank them below some players who were always on top when it mattered the most.

Or like a player dragging a terrible roster to the finals and losing. Like the 2007 or 2018 Cavs both had no business being in the finals, but a great player got them there, yet somehow that feat is used against him today

Championship or bust thinking has really ruined how people view players Tatum isn’t even in his “prime years” yet all people will mention is no ring

In my book, when talking about a player, all team results (championship or not) where that player was a significant factor are worth acknowledging. I would agree that not all results are worth the same thing because not everyone has the same teammates or faces the same opponents, but a result is a result at the end of the day. Looking at the list, I notice a few things that you’ll definitely not see now: 1. Today, I don’t think people who are high on Karl Malone and John Stockton would put them at 13th and 18th respectively. 2. Bob Petit is not likely to be ranked 14th, let alone ahead of guys like Kevin McHale and Scottie Pippen. 3. In addition to Duncan and Kobe being behind Iverson on here, Garnett also would be in front of AI, and possibly Tracy McGrady depending on who you ask. 4. Mark Aguirre is on here at 66. I’ve never seen him in any top 75 lists more recently, and he isn’t even in the Hall of Fame. And 5. I notice that Alex English is in front of Clyde Drexler. I don’t think too many people would say that now.

True! It can also have the opposite effect when you lose early. Kobe is labeled 5-2, but he was the title favorite nine times.

@@kunalpatel1147If you ask me, Jayson Tatum has had a pretty good career for himself so far. Over the last four seasons he’s had 26.8 points on 58.4% true shooting, two first team All-NBA selections and another third team. He’s also one of 122 players in the history of the game with at least one top five MVP finish (fourth last season in his case). True, Tatum doesn’t have a title, and his playoff performance has been described as inconsistent, but he has arguably been the best player on at least one or two conference finals teams. He’s probably one of the best players who isn’t a superstar by consensus, and I’d say he’s had a solid career for himself.

Never ! I am a subscribe since 2018 and all his vídeos are great

Never ever

Andy Hoops is one of the best Pro Basketball RU-vidrs ever.. Dude is pinpoint accurate, passionate about what's talking about and shows great dedication through his work/videos.. Andy Hoops got a fan within me..

Andyhoops, JxmmyHighroller,Jonny Arnett and Crosgrove. My favorite NBA RU-vidrs

@@HOGISIMJAYUN uncut hoops

*cough* Robert Horry

While i agree, these debates about greater players are usually a mix of Better player and better carrer debates. In carrers rings are extremely important so they are given alot of worth

Like how Dame is actually better than Steph Curry but Curry is in a better situation

Duncan was also better than kg, he can have a better supporting cast and also simply be better

@@orangnoe where's same mvp? Scoring title? Something at least that would hint that he's on the same level as Steph cause his stats don't support that idea. His play style is actually easier to contain too...

Rings are team accomplishments and should not be the only important matter when discussing how great a player is. Guys like LeBron, Wilt, Jerry, Elgin, Westbrook, Harden, Cp3, KD are great players who are often criticized for being a loser when they don't take into consideration the teams they were in, the overall health of the team in the playoffs and their opponents. They just casually tell everybody, oh he lost with this kind of lineup, but failed to consider if that lineup was healthy in the first place. Or if the one they're criticizing were playing bad or if they're playing great basketball, it's just that the team he's on isn't producing the same way they should be performing.

And I think the statistic is that four of those losses were game 7 losses of less than five points

He wasn't ranked that high back then he was 8 or 9.. Bird and Magic 🎩 were still in front of him... its not abt making it to the finals and performing well and Jerry will tell you that... what this comes down too is who was the greatest and how did your greatness impact winning Wilt got an * becuase he was SOOOO great amd SOOOO dominate tha noone could stop him and he was playing 5 on 1 and putting up video game numbers and noone could stop him

To me Jerry West is highly underrated and can make a legitimate case for the 2nd best guard in NBA history. He had better stats than Kobe and what is more impressive is that he had much better number in the playoffs. Only reason he lost is because those Celtics teams were stacked. And it's funny the year he won the championship is the year he had one of the worst playoff number of his career which was still good. He is very underrated and should be much higher on people's list.@@vernonherb

Jerry West isn't still The Logo for nothing. He was a legit 2-way monster, a prodigy and legit top 15-20 All Time - but fools today pretend as though a guy like KD deserves to be ranked higher.

Yeah i personally view All-NBA selections more highly than rings when talking about comparing players

Especially when people only use rings when it's convenient for them

It's all because of Jordan stans basically. They inflated the value of rings so much just so LeBron would have no chance of getting the no.1 spot.

@@Greenglower2012bro this is to far it’s literally stats and rings are important an all star isn’t more valuable then being the best player on a championship team

@@goodjoejoe Yup I was gonna say blame jordan fans too. All they say is jordan was 6 for 6 in the finals over and over. And disregard all the years he didnt make the finals. Players being punished for making the finals is one of the dumbest nba narratives there are. Tatum has been getting the same ring culture hate and saying hes trash and not clutch and all this stuff when so many other players havent even made the finals

TBF, Kareem was hated by the media back then for being a grumpy and unpleasant guy towards many reporters and media as a whole. Plus, him being a social activist did not help his case either. Unlike Wilt or MJ, who never said anything regarding their political views. It's also why Bird is often underrated by the media despite being a better overall player cuz Bird played in a smaller market compared to the Laker (IK that Boston is big, but not as big as LA or NY). Bird also did not care much with his media image unlike Magic

Well it seems recently now, a lot of the go to points for people are stats and accolades, which Kareem has both. I think back then it was mostly on winning and your impact in a game? That’s just my presumption though. I do find it weird because not too long ago, Kobe was considered a lock for top 5 at the very least but now it’s different and it’s definitely from the emphasis on stats.

​@cuongquoc5877 back then they just wanted to hoop without talking to reporters lol

@@Spider-Nalgas Bruh, Wilt is the furthest from winning when dude only had like 2 rings, 1 is from joining a Superteam in LA vs Bill's 11 rings. If winning is that important then Bill Russel would be the GOAT according to the 2003 list. And Big O only won his 1 ring when he joined a young Kareem as a 2nd star. People viewed stats more favourable back then compared to now. It was until MJ impact with his rings and domination that they starting to view rings and winning impact more favourable

@@king-ghost1027 nah, Kareem was a subject of racism and many reporters back then were white. Kareem was also an introvert almost borderline antisocial. Magic confirmed this and even Kareem ain't denying this. This is not even a joke

If this video taught me anything is that in 20 years NBA fans will wonder how much we (the current generation of NBA fans) hated LeBron not acknowledging him as the undisputed GOAT. They will wonder how a guy that won sooo much and has all the numbers (traditional AND advanced) on his side wasn't getting the flowers he deserves in real time.

​@@giannis.ioannidis.1995the next generation will criticise Lebron using Wemby the way they so MJ with Bron

Basically what I say and really tired of the arguments and especially everyone just talk LBJ and MJ talk

That’s a fair take

I think tiers would provide a more accurate representation. The greater the players, the more challenging it becomes to discern how much better each one is than the others. For instance, when considering a top 10 list, names like Tim Duncan, Larry Bird, Magic Johnson, Shaquille O'Neal, and Hakeem Olajuwon often come up. Can we confidently assert that one surpasses the others? Everyone weighs their accomplishments differently; some guys will place more weight on peak, others will emphasize trophies, and there's a whole bunch of other categories. Also consider this: if you were to place all of them in a tournament with equally strong supporting casts, would the same player emerge as the winner every time? Probably not, right?

Nope the best of all time is always Mj even in these goofy lists it’s always mj idc he the best then everyone else and Kobe was the greatest of lebrons era not lebron

I don't think it's impossible, but requires a lot of context to fairly compare players from different eras. However, most people who do this online barely have the bare minimum amount of knowledge on players from different eras, that they grossly underestimate their greatness. Naturally, the field of players will become more athletic and more skilled as time goes by. But it's the measure of how great they were comparatively in their era that should determine what makes a player great. Oscar was equally as dominate as MJ was in his era, as LeBron was in his era, as Shaq was in his era, etc. as they all were miles better than the average player of their time.

I can't argue that..

Id also like to say Prime Vince Carter was something else

You know what crazy, the whole Goat debate about are they going to pass Jordan on goat debate is the same exact thing the media has begun to do with LeBron and the draft. Every year somebody who gets drafted number or like the huge name in the draft "Are they the best draft prospect since Lebron???" That's really the media of basketball. Who's going to pass Jordan as the Goat and who's going to pass Lebron as the Goat Draft Prospect

This effected perception (and possibly creation) of stats as well. Stats that show Jordan favorably are, in turn, favored over others.

​@@mrjermz5406that's not true at all .. Noone knew or talked abt VORP or PER or Win shares back then... certian advance antylicis didn't start until the 97 season outside of Jordan prime as nobody was going back to check.. much like nobodt goes back and get the Block starts pre 1973.. if so Bill and Wilt would draft Hakkem record... Point is Jordan's game was so complete because his fundamental were so sharp that despite not knowing abt threse stats he is top 1-3 in these area

​@@vernonherb That is my entire point, the stats were created after his prime, so those who created it would have seen where he stood when validating it's value. You think a stat would have taken hold that painted Jordan unfavorably?

@@mrjermz5406 you're saying that all advanced analytics were validated on the basis of Jordan alone? that's some next level d-riding bro it really aint that deep. the average basketball fan wouldn't even do much research into those stats so it wouldn't even make sense to use that as some sort of "Jordan propaganda". you got some crazy biases against MJ to even come up with this lmao

@@BT405 I said "this may have effected creation of stats". Such an extreme is not even implied in my comments. I am a Bulls fan who began watching basketball because of Jordan by the way, so your other assumptions are also wrong. What I did say is that creators of newer stats could have been unconsciously biased when validating them based on where Jordan landed.

1. I ranked Karl Malone 3d in my “most valuable players since 1976” list. 2. Can’t say anything about Petit since he played before the leagues merge. 3. Those three are definitely above AI but TiMac is way behind (25 vs 52). 4. Aguirre at 60. 5. Clyde is way above English (31 vs 56).

​@andreisevostianov9525 3rd? Lol you have Jordan, LeBron, Magic, Bird, Shaq and Olajuwon no debate more valuable then you have Duncan, Barkley, Durant, Robinson Garnett and nowitzki that have a pretty good argument against him.

Jeez, I’ll be 40 by then.

Unfortunately. Imagine all the guys who are gonna benefit from playing in an era where Rudy Gobert has three "dpoys".

Baylor was never the same after 1965. Yes they should have won in 1969 but the coaching decision to not play Wilt when he was ready to go back in. Probably costed them that title. But that was the only year they all played. Baylor ruptured his Achilles in 1970 and it bothered him till he retired. Plus Wilt was injured. Yes on paper it looked like a super team, and honestly just west and Wilt should have gotten more then 1 title. Not to discredit Baylor because he was that guy even after 65 but not after rupturing his Achilles. That is one of the worst injuries today imagine in 1970.

When we have a ranking of best teams that is were you will find jones, and havlicek. But for all time individuals they will stay low if on there at all. As I know you know the list of most rings have Celtics players filling 8 of the top 10. The 8 are not great individual players some were but most were great for the team. The other two was Robert Horry want to move him up on the list? Kareem was the other. Great teams win titles not great individual. Good luck on finding a team that won with only superstar. That's why Wilt didn't win a championship every year he played.

and Skip for saying lebrons finals losses and saying Jordan was 6 for 6 in the finals over and over again. Getting the finals is a tremendous accomplishment.

Yeah Smith and Bayless is the sole blame for the ring counting thing..

That was the whole media, debate show thing.

Skip and Sas started that culture when Lebron have been compared to their Lord god MJ, which affected a lot of great players just because "rings are the only thing that matters". Great players like Harden, Westbrook, Cp3 are now perceived as trash cause they can't win a single ring, despite their individual accolades being better than most guys who are ahead of them just because they won, while being a support or a role player in those championship teams.

​@@nicksamp515in fairness those guys have all sh!t the bed during playoffs. Regardless of supporting casts.

It only became a thing for NFL qb's after Montana. His flawless Superbowl performance to put him at the best. Then of course Brady came along but Joe was the real greatest he won all 4 and never threw an int. But as we saw it became hard to put 4 over 7 even if Eli beat him twice. Not Payton but stupid looking Eli lol. Titles are for the best teams you dont see anyone arguing to make Robert Horry one of the greatest players? But only him and Kareem are the only two non Celtics players in the top 10 most rings for NBA.

@@jasonnelson6624 Montana and Jordan changed the game and made it about championships. 4 for 4 and 6 for 6 are some magical careers.

@@shorewall how did that change the game? Both had already been done before!

​@@jasonnelson6624it's because not only did they win, but we're the best player on the team when it happened, Out of All 4 Superbowls, Joe Montana won Superbowl MVP 3 of them and out of all 6 NBA finals, Jordan won all 6 Finals MVPs. And the toughest thing about it is he 3 Peated twice in 10 years, You might hear about how some teams might win 4 straight but to 3 peat not once but twice is a Legendary feat. So yes, there might be other players who has a perfect record in the finals but not only be perfect in the finals but to be the best player on that team during that is why those weight Much greater. Why people hold Jordan Over Bill because while Bill has 11 rings, the NBA at the team had only around 8 teams verse when Jordan was doing this, the NBA had 27-28 teams. It's all about context

​​@@shorewallI think it's also in switch it happened. Both of them did it in a 10 Year Time frame and I believe it's because of that reason, the longevity debate they try and district all the time and say "well they did it in a shorter time frame than them" because Joe won in 82, 85, then back to back in 89&90 and Jordan 3 peating Twice from 91-93 then 96-98. So now debate is either they gotta do it in a shorter time frame or if it's a longer time frame they better end up with more rings pretty much which what Tom Brady did to pass up Joe in our books verse the Case of Lebron vs Jordan were Lebron accolades may not match to Jordan because of the 6 Rings & 5 MVPs but Lebron James Records of stats is what he has to back up his case

Criminally Funny 😂😂

Hell, I know Wilt more from Conan than basketball...

Then Wilt should still be 1. Even after advanced statistics. Really anyone looking at stats can't help but see Wilt is on top of all but rings. I'd argue it's media and highlights. Why is Jordan's free throw dunk iconic yet others did it before him and without crossing the freethrow line? Plus the NBA need hype in current players they have to sell tickets. Retired players can't sell tickets.

​@@jasonnelson6624Wilt's stats look a lot worse in the playoffs, where it mattered most. I think we're giving a little too much credence to all the times Wilt stat padded against inferior teams. All those 60 point games in the regular season and not a single one in the playoffs? Meanwhile Jordan actually upped his average in the playoffs. Advanced stats are useful for comparing across eras because players played more minutes and the pace was increased in the 60s. Per 100 possessions, Wilt's 50 PPG year equals out to about 41.5, which is a mark Jordan eclipsed 8 times.

@@alexloeher8628 Yes on the surface his stats look worse. However if someone watches Wilts playoff games they would see why his scoring dropped off. Plus the idea of playing against sub par competition doesn't hold up. Wilt played against multiple hall of fame centers that are listed as all time greats. How come not a single one of these greats put up number like Wilt? Yet he did against them. Jordan's playoff improvement is not impressive or unexpectedly to me. Look at who they played. What good sg did he play against? Clyde and Danny Ainge and Cooper. Plus Jordan's had hall of fame teammates and coach. Last point is Wilts "padded" stats and low playoff scoring was know. These knocks have always been there and never impacted his ranking until lately. Funny how you would find a single player who played before 1980 they won't place Jordan as number 1. Let along above Wilt. I do understand your points, I actually shared some of those opinions. It made no sense to me if Wilt is so great how come he didnt win more titles or score in the playoffs? Once I did research my opinion changed. It's easy to discredit him and his records because there video game numbers on easy mode. He was still getting contact offers in his late 40's to 50. Who else can say that?

Exactly.. for example: Karl Malone has better stats than tim Duncan and is 3rd all time in career points. They both won 2 mvps with Duncan having more all NBA selections but most people have Duncan as the clear best PF in NBA history over Malone and say things like "its not even close" but lets say Malone ended his career with 3 rings to go along with his accolades and stats would be hard not to put him over duncan . I've seen people list KG and Dirk ahead of Malone because they won one bring and he didn't. All in all just rings should be used to compare guys who have similar accolades and stats especially if the players are top 15 players

Facts and it’s weird to me too. It’s just a lot of new notions that seem to get pushed now by fans and media for debate.

People dock points from him being "carried" by Shaq (not true) even tho Kobe was arguably the best player throughout the western finals of those 3 finals runs. Shaq was just the most dominant in the finals

I think one of the reason is that Kobe and Lebron's careers overlap. Despite Kobe's greatness, it's obvious that Lebron is the more complete player and has better leadership.

Stats becoming more popular and available (his overall stats don't paint him as top 5), on top of more basketball platforms being available for analysts to speak on what used to be lesser valued areas of the game and great players adding more to their legacies for some to rank them over him (Curry & KD). However, I have Kobe within range for my top 5.

@@bobbysmoove4796 The thing about that too is that the notion of him only winning with Shaq had already been squashed back in 09, but now it’s kind of like they forgot or don’t know. In 2010, it was how Kobe now had one more than Shaq. Hell, Kobe almost even 3-peaked again with Pau.

Around 1980 there was a "ranking" where people picked the best players of all time to an all star game. The only unanimous player was Bill Russell.