What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

2020 Greatest of All Time Sports Draft-Zow wins, Judges still suck (1 Viewer)

Almost started a ####ty post complaining that this isn't an "NBA team" but re-read and saw it's nominated for the best "NBA Moment." Fair enough (although arguable that it's more of a basketball moment than an NBA moment). 
it transformed the NBA into the worldwide force it is today - it was transcendent in every respect, it certainly was an NBA moment 

 
Hard to argue that the '95-'96 Bulls aren't strongly in the consideration for the best NBA team ever. They had the shooting and could probably have adapted. But, take a look at the number of total threes taking by that team and the other good team of that era. They had no idea the value of the three pointer. If they matched up to GS in some mythical time machine tournament I think GS trashes the Bulls - at least in the first game or two - because GS spreading the ball so well and hitting three-pointers from all over by multiple guys averaging greater than 41% per clip would be a total shock to the Bulls and they wouldn't even know what hit them let alone how to guard it.  
Ok, that could be true if you are assuming that the teams only have the knowledge of their own time.

But put the Warriors in 1970 and would they not be a similar disadvantage?  Or do we assume that they have full knowledge of history?  If that is the case, then it probably would significantly warp this whole thing,

 
14.11 - Greatest Horse - Affirmed

Sometimes, a great horse is not measured by times alone, but by how they responded when challenged. Affirmed had a (for now unnamed) rival, who he narrowly beat in all three triple crown races. First by a length and a half, then by a neck, then by a head. That's greatness.

 
  • Smile
Reactions: Zow
one thing that I have trouble with when it comes to NBA is how teams would work in different eras.  I had the 95-96 Bulls as number 1 because I genuinely believe that the makeup of their team would have worked at any time.  

At the end of the day, I guess the most sensible thing is just to compare their relative dominance at their time (and obviously the Warriors are right at the top based on that criterion), but it is just something that I have been pondering.  
I think the era question is suitable for all categories....not just team categories...
Yea, you have to take these things within the context of their timeframe, competition, rules, etc.

Plus, what if we put the Warriors in an NBA with far more relaxed contact rules and no three point line? 

 
OK ... The picks since my last selection have thrown quite a monkey wrench into my rankings. It was like you guys got a copy of my cheat sheet of something. So time to regroup. After running a few new mocks, I will be following an updated strategy. So this new journey towards victory starts with selecting ... 

 
14.12 --  MARGARET COURT  -- WOMENS SPORTS, Greatest Tennis Player (54)

Margaret amassed more major titles than any other player in history and is considered one of the greatest tennis players of all time. 

In 1970, Court became the first woman during the Open era to win the singles Grand Slam (all four major tournaments in the same calendar year). In total she won 24 singles Grand Slam titles, a record that still stands. She also won 19 women's doubles Grand Slam titles and 21 mixed doubles Grand Slam titles, giving her a record 64 Grand Slam titles overall !!!

Her all surfaces (hard, clay, grass and carpet) singles career-winning percentage of 91.74 is the best of all time. In 1973, Court set the record for most titles won in a single Grand Slam event, with her 11th Australian Open win. This record was surpassed by Rafael Nadal on June 9, 2019 when he won his 12th French Open title.

Court is one of only three players in history to have won the "Grand Slam Boxed Set", consisting of every Grand Slam title (singles, doubles and mixed doubles). And she is the only one in tennis history to do this TWICE! 

The International Tennis Hall of Fame states: "For sheer strength of performance and accomplishment there has never been a tennis player to match her.

Critics will knock Margaret a bit for playing in an era that wasn’t as tough as today’s game, but her dominance during that period shows she was an absolute master who never took a match lightly. Court’s 24 Grand Slam singles championships is still the all-time mark and includes a remarkable 11 wins at her home tournament, the Australian Open.

To put her excellence into perspective … she has 192 career singles titles, Serena has 73 !

Additional Honors

  • Member of the Order of the British Empire (MBE)
  • 2x ABC Sportsman of the Year Award (1963 & 1970)
  • Walter Lindrum Award (1970)
  • Member of the International Tennis Hall of Fame
  • Member of the Sport Australia Hall of Fame with Legend status
  • Member of the Australian Tennis Hall of Fame
  • Winner of the Australian Sports Medal
  • Winner of the Centenary Medal
  • Member of the Victorian Honour Roll of Women
  • Winnner of the Australia Post Australian Legends Award
  • Winner of the Philippe Chatrier Award
  • Officer of the Order of Australia
Welcome aboard Margaret … Go ask Rafael if he’d like to play a match against you!

 
14.13 1995-96 Kentucky Wildcats- Greatest NCAA Basketball Team (33)

The Kentucky Wildcats were arguably the deepest team in college basketball history. They had 5 first round draft picks in Walter McCarty, Antoine Walker, Tony Delk, Derek Anderson and Ron Mercer and 4 other players who made in to the NBA. 9 players from one team in the NBA, that’s almost every player on the team.

"The Untouchables finished 1st in the nation in Points, assists and steals. 3rd in total rebounding

Kentucky finished the season with a 34-2 record and went undefeated in conference play. The won SEC games by an average of 29 points. During the season they won a school record 27 straight games. The Wildcats won every game in the tournament by an average of 21 points including a 76-67 victory of Syracuse in the Championship game. Total Domination!

@AAABatteries

 
Last edited by a moderator:
14.13 1995-96 Kentucky Wildcats- Greatest NCAA Basketball Team (33)

The Kentucky Wildcats were arguably the deepest team in college basketball history. They had 5 first round draft picks in Walter McCarty, Antoine Walker, Tony Delk, Derek Anderson and Ron Mercer and 4 other players who made in to the NBA. 9 players from one team in the NBA, that’s almost every player on the team.

"The Untouchables finished 1st in the nation in Points, assists and steals. 3rd in total rebounding

Kentucky finished the season with a 34-2 record and went undefeated in conference play. The won SEC games by an average of 29 points. During the season they won a school record 27 straight games. The Wildcats won every game in the tournament by an average of 21 points including a 76-67 victory of Syracuse in the Championship game. Total Domination!
Wow I forgot about that fact.  Crazy. 

ETA: Also crazy that the best team from the year prior didn't produce any of the best players from the subsequent stacked draft. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
14.14 - Kirk Gibson WS Game 1 Walk-Off Home Run - MLB - Greatest Baseball Moment or Game

I remember watching this live as a kid - still goosebumps when I watch it.  Having a legend like Vin Scully making the call just makes it all the better.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0toCMwEBwLo

Long version - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4nwMDZYXTI
surprised it lasted this long.  i went back and forth between this and Bobby Thompson.  of course my interpretation of "moment" was obviously different from others.

 
The problem with that Warriors team is that they never faced a great center. And they didn’t have a center. I think they lose to most of the other great NBA teams that will be drafted, frankly. 
this is what pushed me off of them, as well ... but they did dominate who was in front of 'em, which should be the main criteria when comparing x generational teams/eras. 

nevertheless, i tend to agree. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
14.15 - Ryan Lochte - Greatest Male Swimmer (Category 44)

Phelps is the undeniable #1 but after that there is a case to be made the Lochte is #2.  He has more total medals and individual medals that Spitz and he probably would have easily been #2 if not for having to compete against the undeniable #1 in Phelps. 

From Wikipedia:

Lochte is the second-most decorated swimmer in Olympic history measured by total number of medals, behind only Michael Phelps.[2] Lochte's seven individual Olympic medals rank second in history in men's swimming (again to Michael Phelps), tied for second among all Olympic swimmers. He currently holds the world records in the 200-meter individual medley (long and short course). As part of the American teams, he also holds the world record in the 4×200-meter freestyle (long course) and 4x100-meter freestyle (mixed) relay.

Lochte's success has earned him SwimSwam's Swammy Award for U.S. Male Swimmer of the Year in 2013,[3] the World Swimmer of the Year Award and the American Swimmer of the Year Award twice. He has also been named the FINA Swimmer of the Year three times. He has won a total of 90 medals in major international competition (54 gold, 22 silver, and 14 bronze) spanning the Olympics, the World Championships, Pan American Games, and Pan Pacific Championships, including six Olympic gold medals and 39 world championship titles.

Lochte specializes in the backstroke and individual medley, but is also a freestyle and butterfly swimmer. He is noted for the speed and distance he attains while kicking underwater. Lochte is also known for his dominance in the short course format (25-yard and 25-meter-long pools). Lochte swam the 100-meter individual medley in 50.71 seconds on December 15, 2012, at the FINA World Championships in Istanbul, Turkey. At this same event, he is also credited with swimming the fastest 200-meter individual medley, finishing in 1 minute 49.63 seconds.[4]

 
The problem with that Warriors team is that they never faced a great center. And they didn’t have a center. I think they lose to most of the other great NBA teams that will be drafted, frankly. 
But the other teams didn't have to face the spread offense and potent 3 pt shooting where all 5 guys on the court could shoot well from beyond the arc.  It would be an interesting contrast in styles to see which would win out.  I wouldn't say it's a for sure they lose to other great teams. 

 
This is like saying the Red Sox didn't bunt enough in 2004. (I will not use the potential cheaters of 2018). 
more like saying their whole pitching staff was right-handed and were lucky enough to not have to face any good left-handed hitters

 
14.15 - Ryan Lochte - Greatest Male Swimmer (Category 44)

Phelps is the undeniable #1 but after that there is a case to be made the Lochte is #2.  He has more total medals and individual medals that Spitz and he probably would have easily been #2 if not for having to compete against the undeniable #1 in Phelps. 
Excellent scoring move & nothing personal but, when this began, my perverse nature caused me to ask myself - considering how extensive this draft is - when would be the moment when this draft jumped the shark. i instantly answered, "when Ryan Lochte is chosen among the greatest anything". The more you know🌈

 
Last edited by a moderator:
But the other teams didn't have to face the spread offense and potent 3 pt shooting where all 5 guys on the court could shoot well from beyond the arc.  It would be an interesting contrast in styles to see which would win out.  I wouldn't say it's a for sure they lose to other great teams. 
I get that. 

But in terms of pure odds, a team that gets closer to the basket should win more often. As great as those shooters on the Warriors are, the baskets are never going to fall as often as balls shot within 10 feet. I would rather have a Kareem sky hook, even contested, from 10 feet than a wide open Curry from 30 feet. I trust the sky hook more. 

 
The problem with that Warriors team is that they never faced a great center. And they didn’t have a center. I think they lose to most of the other great NBA teams that will be drafted, frankly. 
Kareem has been drafted as the greatest center of all-time. I don't disagree. I also don't disagree that the warriors didn't face anybody like him. Kareem's career FG% was .596. 

The Warriors shot ~41% from three point. 

So let's do simple math. 

2 points x .596 = 1.192 points per shot. 

3 points x .41 = 1.23 point per shot. 

Simple math says the Warriors win. Using the NBA's far more advanced "Math Team Rating" they're third best ever regular season team and second best ever post-season team. Using just general NBA common sense the way the Warriors pushed the ball, spread the ball, and shot the ball would likely have rendered a pure center quite hindered. 

 
Kareem has been drafted as the greatest center of all-time. I don't disagree. I also don't disagree that the warriors didn't face anybody like him. Kareem's career FG% was .596. 

The Warriors shot ~41% from three point. 

So let's do simple math. 

2 points x .596 = 1.192 points per shot. 

3 points x .41 = 1.23 point per shot. 

Simple math says the Warriors win. Using the NBA's far more advanced "Math Team Rating" they're third best ever regular season team and second best ever post-season team. Using just general NBA common sense the way the Warriors pushed the ball, spread the ball, and shot the ball would likely have rendered a pure center quite hindered. 
This is not fair math because Kareem’s scoring percentage against the Warriors is going to be higher than his lifetime average (who’s guarding him?) and the Warriors shooting average is going to be lower against Kareem. 

 
I get that. 

But in terms of pure odds, a team that gets closer to the basket should win more often. As great as those shooters on the Warriors are, the baskets are never going to fall as often as balls shot within 10 feet. I would rather have a Kareem sky hook, even contested, from 10 feet than a wide open Curry from 30 feet. I trust the sky hook more. 


Kareem has been drafted as the greatest center of all-time. I don't disagree. I also don't disagree that the warriors didn't face anybody like him. Kareem's career FG% was .596. 

The Warriors shot ~41% from three point. 

So let's do simple math. 

2 points x .596 = 1.192 points per shot. 

3 points x .41 = 1.23 point per shot. 

Simple math says the Warriors win. Using the NBA's far more advanced "Math Team Rating" they're third best ever regular season team and second best ever post-season team. Using just general NBA common sense the way the Warriors pushed the ball, spread the ball, and shot the ball would likely have rendered a pure center quite hindered. 
Zow beat me to it.  There is a point at where a 3 pt shot becomes more valuable and the Warriors were as good as there has ever been.....to date.

 
Excellent scoring move & nothing personal but, when this began, my perverse nature caused me to ask myself - considering how extensive this draft is - when would be the moment when this draft jumped the shark. i instantly answered, "when Ryan Lochte is chosen as the greatest anything". The more you know🌈
I agree with your sentiment.  Doing research on the swimmers it was surprising how well Lochte compared historically.  He really is likely the 2nd best male swimmer of all time based on his accomplishments (especially when considering he was going head to head with Phelps for a lot of his career).

 
Last edited by a moderator:
This is not fair math because Kareem’s scoring percentage against the Warriors is going to be higher than his lifetime average (who’s guarding him?) and the Warriors shooting average is going to be lower against Kareem. 
I’ll concede that Kareem’s percentage may go up a little. But why would the warriors shooting average become lower against Kareem? Is kareem allowed to goal tend? Also, did kareem’s team magically get faster?

 
The star center is becoming obsolete, not because of efficiency, but because top big men are and have always been instant stars and the measure of stars in the league right now is how much coaching one can ignore/resist. The fish rots from that head, making players as/more talented than many of our alltimers - KAT, Embiid, Drummond - the center of their teams' incompetence. Kareem 2020 would have had a frosh year of Wooden and agents running his brand, his fellows seething over his instant maxness and divability. The result, unless his coach & star conspired to create a culture, would be similar to what's happening w those i cited. This will all change, as the game always eventually does, but it will be a long strange transition

 
This is not fair math because Kareem’s scoring percentage against the Warriors is going to be higher than his lifetime average (who’s guarding him?) and the Warriors shooting average is going to be lower against Kareem. 
I’ll concede that Kareem’s percentage may go up a little. But why would the warriors shooting average become lower against Kareem? Is kareem allowed to goal tend? Also, did kareem’s team magically get faster? 
 

Also, when Kareem played, the three point line was closer...

 
The star center is becoming obsolete, not because of efficiency, but because top big men are and have always been instant stars and the measure of stars in the league right now is how much coaching one can ignore/resist. The fish rots from that head, making players as/more talented than many of our alltimers - KAT, Embiid, Drummond - the center of their teams' incompetence. Kareem 2020 would have had a frosh year of Wooden and agents running his brand, his fellows seething over his instant maxness and divability. The result, unless his coach & star conspired to create a culture, would be similar to what's happening w those i cited. This will all change, as the game always eventually does, but it will be a long strange transition
Drummond was just a big baby who had zero toughness. He had all the athleticism, size and strength but he wasn’t very skilled and didn’t improve in the skill area...on top of being a brat. He is the ultimate anti-Piston

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Drummond was just a big baby who had zero toughness. He had all the athleticism, size and strength but he wasn’t very skilled and didn’t improve in the skill area...on top of being a brat. He is the ultimate anti-Piston
oops, spotlight. sry -

Drummond woulda made Lanier or Laimbeer look silly had he been raised right, ballwise
 
Last edited by a moderator:
oops, spotlight. sry -

Drummond woulda made Lanier or Laimbeer look silly had he been raised right, ballwise
I agree although it’s mostly his own fault imo. He went UCONN for a year and by all accounts didn’t give a #### about the program or the team and was just waiting to go pro. He was just always a guy who wanted to get by on his insane natural gifts. He wanted it to be easy and just happened to be so blessed that he’s been able to do it.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I agree although it’s mostly his own fault imo. He went UCONN for a year and by all accounts didn’t give a #### about the program or the team and was just waiting to go pro. He was just always a guy who wanted to get by on his insane natural gifts. He wanted it to be easy and just happened to be so blessed that he’s been able to do it.
it's a beautiful, beautiful game if learned right but it aint being taught. skills, unbelievable skills are taught/learned, but not utilized. as we can see now, the Dubs taught each other more than their coaches did and, suddenly, treys that had been around for 30 yrs were the way to beat anyone. i look fwd to the game of treys, the game of switches AND the game of floating posts being used in concert, but it will take situations where a group finds it in their talent & best interest to do so, because today's game is about making rich guys dance to the hoopsters' tune, not finding the best basket each time down the floor.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The star center is becoming obsolete, not because of efficiency, but because top big men are and have always been instant stars and the measure of stars in the league right now is how much coaching one can ignore/resist. The fish rots from that head, making players as/more talented than many of our alltimers - KAT, Embiid, Drummond - the center of their teams' incompetence. Kareem 2020 would have had a frosh year of Wooden and agents running his brand, his fellows seething over his instant maxness and divability. The result, unless his coach & star conspired to create a culture, would be similar to what's happening w those i cited. This will all change, as the game always eventually does, but it will be a long strange transition
I think a factor you are forgetting is AAU ball.  The game is all about 3's now so big men are not developing traditional big men type game.  It's all 3's these days and that is what is being cultivated at AAU.  It's just a different (evolving) game now and it starts with the development at youth levels.  The first thing any kid does is out to the 3pt line.  That's all they want to do.

 
I think a factor you are forgetting is AAU ball.  The game is all about 3's now so big men are not developing traditional big men type game.  It's all 3's these days and that is what is being cultivated at AAU.  It's just a different (evolving) game now and it starts with the development at youth levels.  The first thing any kid does is out to the 3pt line.  That's all they want to do.

Ralph Sampson Syndrome - been following it a while...
 
OK.  I figured I would just get done with my swimming categories on one fail swoop and go with

15.02 - Tracy Caulkins - Greatest Female Swimmer (Category 59)

She could do it all and is probably the best all around swimmer.  She would have vaulted up the total Olympic medal count rankings had the US not boycotted the 1980 summer Olympics.  That shouldn't take away how dominate she was in her day. 

Caulkins was noted for her versatility and ability in all four major competitive swimming strokes: the butterfly, breaststroke, backstroke and freestyle. Caulkins won forty-eight national championships and set American records in all four strokes over a range of distances as well as in the individual medley (IM) events, which combine all four strokes over the course of a single race. Her versatility brought Caulkins many titles and awards, and as a result she is considered one of the greatest swimmers of all time. By the time she retired from competitive swimming in 1984, Caulkins had set five world records and sixty-three American records (more than any other American swimmer, male or female).[1] 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Of course the recent Warriors team have put their stamp on the game as 3-point specialists. I have to say, though, that all three of the teams selected so far as "Best NBA team" would be able to adjust a good bit to today's game.

The 95-96 Bulls and the 85-86 Celtics both had at-the-time elite 3-point shooting. Everyone (that's middle-aged :D  ) remembers Larry Bird being good behind the arc, and probably a lot of fans remember Steve Kerr being deadeye from deep and Michael Jordan being no slouch himself. But both of these squads had four legit 3-point weapons on their rosters, some of whom would see hugely increased minutes in the modern game.

3-point shooters used to kind of be like specialists ... not really guys you would build an attack around, but guys who could come in for a spell and disrupt the flow of the game to his team's advantage. For the 1986 Celts, they had not only Bird knocking them down from deep, but also Danny Ainge, Jerry Sichting, and 2-time All-Star Scott Wedman. The 1996 Bulls, similarly, had four sharpshooters: Kerr (led the NBA at 51.5%!), Jordan, Toni Kukoc, and Jud Beuchler (Scottie Pippen attempted plenty, but was less efficient than those four).

What would've changed a lot for those older teams playing in the modern era was their bench rotations. The 1996 Bulls would've used a lot less of Ron Harper (26.9% from 3) and a lot more of Beuchler (44.4%). And their trio of interior foul-collectors (Luc Longley, Bill Wennington, and Dickie Simpkins) would've been a lot less useful.

As for the 1986 Celtics, Bird and Ainge could've added more volume from 3 to fit in the modern game ... though their statistical efficiency was somewhat less than even the Bulls team ten years later. Sichting and Wedman were plenty efficient from deep, but didn't get near the volume that top modern 3-point shooters get. A long guy like Kevin McHale, IMHO, would still have a role in today's game -- he was ~60% from inside 12 feet during his prime, and I think that would be tick higher today. The Celtic who would really get left behind would be bench banger Bill Walton -- it just wouldn't be fair to ask him to chase modern 5s around the perimeter.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top