Who is the G.O.A.T.?

In sports like football, it is tougher to make the case that someone can be considered the greatest player ever, mainly due to there being so many moving parts, that you can impact a game, but won’t truly have the type of impact that they can have if the sport was different. July gray players can affect the game when they’re in, but when they’re not, they’re at the mercy of the rest of the team they play for.

For instance, Lawrence Taylor:

Is widely considered to be one of the best defenders in football EVER, and yet, he was only on the field for half the time (less than that, if he wreaked havoc, like he was known to do), and therefore, could not impact the sport as much as he might have wanted to.

Same with someone like Barry Bonds:

They could not pitch to him to get him on base, but he is only one man of nine, and if the other team can avoid him, and his pitcher is off, then it can effectively nullify his impact on the game, or risk this happening:

A game like basketball, however, is much different. A player can be dominant on both the offensive, and defensive end, with other teams clamoring to scheme against them. I could attempt to argue about how to distinguish G.O.A.T. players in each sport, but I am going to focus on basketball because it’s my favorite sport.

The elements that go into who I believe is the G.O.A.T. are (in no particular order):

Attribute #1: Winning

Let’s be perfectly honest, playing basketball is about winning. There are some that are stats oriented, but as they age, winning definitely becomes the most important goal. That is why winning is the number one thing I look for in terms of who I consider the G.O.A.T. If the best player and their team did not win, as a star, All-Star, or Superstar, that ultimately falls on them, like it or not. Because basketball is a game that can be so openly influenced by a player or two, winning is necessary to enter the conversation of greatest of all time. At least having one is a start, but to really enter this conversation, the standard is at least two, which disqualifies a lot of stars that could have pushed their way into the conversation based on their individual production. Production is essential (as we will see as this post unfolds), but the main goal of any sport is to win while being the best at it, so anyone who does not win can not have a seat at the G.O.A.T. table, no matter how bad they want to sit at it.

Example: Bill Russell

Attribute #2: Statistics

Being able to point to your statistical prowess is something that is very strong for what can qualify or disqualify someone from being entered into the G.O.A.T. conversation. Robert Horry has 7 rings (which would put him ahead of other players if winning was the only metric) but because he only averaged 7 points for his career, he is disqualified. Production normally puts that player in the discussion for best player on the team (outside of rare occasions), and elite production will set them up for one of the best players in the league. Sustained production will usher them into best player of their era, and elite production for a career sustaining amount of time can get them into the greatest building. There are those are mentioned simply because they produced at such a high level for such a long time, that they simply can not be ignored, even though their production did not lead to winning. Some stats were not recorded at the time old heads were playing, otherwise some other numbers would have been even more extreme (such as blocks.). Talent, conveniently, goes in this category. being able to do whatever is necessary on the court is a hallmark of great players. You need a bucket? Check. You need a timely pass? Got it. Need a tough rebound? Done. Need someone locked up? They can do it, and do it at an elite level. Talent and hard work produces stats, and regular season stats matter, but not as much as postseason stats matter, as I’ll explain later on.

Example: Wilt Chamberlain

Attribute #3: Era

At the time they played, how was the competition? What were the rules? What was allowed, and what was not? Who did the rules benefit? All of those questions matter in the quest for finding the G.O.A.T. Playing in an era where offense is marketed and encouraged is a knock on that player’s case, as is playing in a league where there weren’t many trees aside from themselves. Those things matter. Being able to dominate smaller men should be easier for taller men, and being able to score when the defense can’t touch the offensive player should bolster the numbers for the offensive player, while making it harder for a defensive player to really have the proper impact on the offensive player. Scoring 30 in a league where teams average 120 means less than scoring 30 when teams were routinely averaging 90 to 100 points.

Attribute #4: Teams

The team aspect is important from a few different factors. Firstly, look at the team the individual played on. How many other All Stars did the player play with, and how many capable role players were on the team. Many players have the capability to improve the play of their teammates, but how do the same players perform on the absence of their best player? Do they feel empowered to be great, or are they only great when that player is there to positively impact their greatness? How well did they perform before the player got there, versus how well did they fare after the best player left the team?

The other side of this, obviously, is the talent in the league. How good were the other teams, and how good was the league overall? Were there teams that dominated the league, or was there competitive balance? Was the talent spread throughout the league, or did super teams exist? How many good teams did they defeat on their way to their championships? How good were the teams? How many times have they went to game 7? How did they perform on the biggest stage, the Finals? How did they perform in the playoffs in general compared to average players? Performance dipping in the playoffs is an important indicator of greatness, as the best rise to the meet the moment, in the moments when their teammates look for them most.

Summary:

I grade those who want to be considered the G.O.A.T. harshly, as the criteria for being the greatest should be steep, and not many should be allowed to be mentioned. As such, only a few come to mind, and there are some that get mentioned that I don’t feel deserve to be mentioned in the G.O.A.T. conversation. As for who I feel is the G.O.A.T.:

Michael Jordan

And in another post somewhere down the line, I’ll explain why.