65 sats \ 2 replies \ @Voldemort 23 Apr \ on: NBA GOAT Debate Thought Experiment Stacker_Sports
I forgot to answer this part. I don't think so.
I think there are other teams I could build with fewer GOATs that would beat the shooters more easily/consistently. Or even beat the GOATs more easily.
This is difficult to measure, but for my money, the GOAT is the player I want on my team to win me a game or a series. Or in other words - who would I never bet against while they were playing?
I would never bet against MJ. Kobe is up there, Lebron is up there, Bird is up there, but there are times I would have bet against all of them.
That's a good way to put it. I still think it's telling that a team literally made up of the GOAT at each position might lose to a team specifically made up of just the best shooter at each position.
I think you're right, though, that this tells us a lot about what the GOATs are. They're more like the highest ceiling raisers or the guys who the best teams can be built around.
For instance, if you replace any of the Shooters with the GOAT from the same position, the resulting team is probably quite a bit better.
reply
Yes, totally.
I think 2016 was an excellent example of this. Curry and Thompson are arguably the best three point shooters of all time and they had Durant. A team of excellent shooters had the best record of all time at 73-9. All that fire power still couldn't take down Lebron when he decided to take over the series.
reply