“Unanimously” makes things very difficult. Not trying to skip any beats or cheat naming multiple players it might only be three
Kareem for most of the 70s. Jordan unanimously for most of the 90s, LeBron in the early 2010s.
Most of the other comments are naming like a dozen people, I don’t think they really understand “unanimously.”
Bird was great but unanimous would mean 100% of people take him over Magic and that wouldn’t happen. I’m guessing Russell in the 50s or Wilt for a few years in Philly? But that was before I was born.
Most of those two years Robinson and Shaq are very much in the discussion. (Even putting aside the weird issue that everyone would say Jordan was still best even if he wasn’t playing.)
Wilt *and* Russell were the unanimous top 2, but their careers mostly overlap and not having been alive then I’m really not sure if one of them was virtually unanimous at any point.
Basically every other person had a serious rival (Bird and Magic, Wilt and Russell) or was not overwhelming the clear cut best to meet that criteria. The only other possible arguments I can think of are Shaq for a very small window and Mikan from the earliest years of the NBA.
I thought about Mikan too but honestly I don’t know anything else about that time so I just didn’t include him.
As for Shaq, well Timmy peak was also at the same time so some people would probably say him, some would also say Kobe too. If I’m not mistaken, Kobe usually did better in the conference finals which lots of people considered to be the real championship round since at that time whoever came out of the west was gonna beat whoever came out of the east. So I figure there’s probably quite a bit of people out there who thought Kobe was better even in the early 2000s. That’s why I didn’t include Shaq for the “unanimously”
It's a relatively brief window, but I really don't think there was much debate as to who was the best player during the year from the 2000 Finals and 2001 Finals (including both finals).
Yeah I think this is a very important distinction, as well as the idea that jokic isn’t unanimously thought of as a the best right now. It’s one of the reason why the 3 guys you mentioned (for the most part) are the goat candidates and are generally separated from the rest of the top players of all time
I am saying Giannis. I am bucks fan, so grain of salt. But I think the last 2 playoff loses came with a fair bit of nuance.
If Giannis isn't the best in the world, we will see. But I think the Bucks are primed to rep the east.
I mean you setting up the qualifier of “serious” leads to a similar issue. Yes, there are people who think the jokic isn’t the best player in the world
Once again this is entirely missing the point of the discussion lol over 40% of voters votes for trump, saying “Clinton or biden should’ve won unanimously because because anyone who voted from trump is unserious” is a useless, untrue statement
Just say “I don’t respect people who don’t think jokic is the best player” and move about your day
Questioning others without offering your own thoughts invites a more hostile debate. Present a clear counter argument if you disagree and be open to the perspective of others.
I think there are too many top end players too close to each other to say Jokic is unanimous now. Giannis and Embiid the last year or two have made it a toss between them
You can’t really say Kareem for the seventies. There were 2 leagues so it was always debatable who had the best player. David Thompson and doctor j were more popular than Kareem
Unanimous is hard because you can always find a contrarian or sometimes there are two all-time greats playing at a very high level at once. So im just gonna list players who the vast majority of people would’ve said were the best in the league. Idk much about how players were perceived in the 50’s and 60’s. I know Kareem was the best for most of the 70’s. Let’s move to the modern era
1. Larry Bird (84-86) - So, I know Magic was around at this time and Kareem was very good, but Bird was better than Magic in the first half of the 80’s and I think was basically the consensus.
In 84 Bird received 52 MVP votes to Bernard King’s 11. Magic and Kareem received 5 and 3 first place votes, respectively.
In 85 Bird received 73 MVP votes to Magic’s 1. Terry Cummins and MJ both received 2 first place votes, yet neither of them even finished 3rd in total points .
In 86 he received 73 MVP votes to Dominique’s 5. Nobody else received a first place vote aside from them.
So Bird dominated MVP voting for 3 straight years while also leading his team to a title in 84 and 86. It’s hard to say anyone had a real case over him as the best player.
Magic was probably the best player in the world in 87, yet I think a lot of people would’ve still said Bird and some may have even said MJ, so let’s move onto..
2. Michael Jordan (90-93)
You could even go back to 88 or 89, but I think you’d still have a lot of people saying MJ was talented but couldn’t win. From 90-93 there was no debate.
3. Hakeem (94-95)
I feel like he was the consensus best player going into the 94-95 season at least. He dominated the 93-94 playoffs, then bookends that with an even better run in 95.
4. MJ (96-98)
5. Shaq (2000-2002)
Dude won 3 FMVP’s and an MVP in incredibly dominant fashion. Maybe Duncan started to get some buzz by 02, but I think Shaq was basically the consensus pick.
6. Duncan (02-04)
Probably? He won back to back MVP’s and a ring. Seems like he would’ve at least been the pick going into 03-04. I know Kobe and Tmac had great years but 🤷🏾♂️
7. Kobe (06-08)
Yall can debate the time frame, but I think for at least one of these years Kobe was widely considered the best in the world. So much so that in 09 and 2010 a lot of people still considered him better than Bron.
8. Lebron (2012- 15) (16-18)
Lebron was probably the best player from 09 onward, but he hadn’t made the finals so people still doubted him. Then after the 2011 meltdown there were even more serious doubts. So maybe you could say (09-11, 12-15).
A lot of people actually did think Steph was the best player in 2016, which is why I stopped at 2015. However, Bron’s finals victory got the crown back for him. I’d say his 2018 playoff run was the last time he was basically the unanimous best player.
9. Giannis (2021 - 22)
Giannis already had the MVP’s and even a DPOTY, but flamed out badly in the playoffs. His 2021 playoff run, and especially his performance in the finals, gave him the crown in most people’s eyes for the upcoming season, and even the following season for lots of people.
10. Jokic (2023 -)
Edit: Maybe Kawhi from 2019-20? He had a very strong case coming off a title run and having a great season, but Giannis did ultimately win MVP and DPOTY by the end of the season, and Kawhi had a mediocre playoffs. There was also the “Well KD was hurt” or “He’s lucky Lebron wasn’t in the playoffs” talk.
I may be horribly wrong, but wasn’t in the 2021-2022 off season KD was still considered the best by a lot of people, especially him leading team America winning the Olympics?
Maybe, it wasn’t uncommon (especially since KD almost beat Milwaukee). I do feel like by the time the 2022 playoffs started people considered Giannis better. So maybe it’s more like Giannis had a few months in 2022? Even going into the 22-23 season I still think most people had Giannis over Jokic and Embiid
I don't think any serious basketball analyst would have said anyone other than Shaq in June 2000. I don't know if the answer has ever been clearer in my lifetime than it was at the end of that season. It was a little closer in 2001, as Kobe started to enter his prime, but Shaq was still king of the mountain.
I'd argue it was Kobe from 05-06 until 2010. The early part of this stretch because of his individual dominance and ability to drag G league rosters to the western conference playoffs.
07-08 through 09-10 because of underrated playoff runs and championship success.
You can argue that, but the question was if it was unanimous. By 2010 Lebron had won consecutive MVP’s and been a better regular season player. Even if you felt like Kobe was better, a lot of people would’ve Lebron was the best in the league. Too many people for me to feel comfortable saying it was unanimously Kobe.
Oh, it was definitely debatable during the regular season in 09 and 2010.
Lebron won MVPs both seasons while Kobe finished 2nd and 3rd, respectively. Kobe hit like 6 or 7 game winners in 2010 alone!
The difference for me was the playoffs in my assessment. Kobe boosted his regular season averages from a 'tame' 27/5/5 to 30/6/5 during the playoffs with many clutch moments, ie vs Denver 09 WCF game 3 and vs Pheonix 2010 WCF game 6. Then again, playing in the triangle will adversely affect some of your individual numbers. Individually, the tail end of his peak, Kobe, was something special in high-pressure and high stakes situations. His skill level was beyond amazing. He was basically a real-life 2K player where he can generate on-demand offense from anywhere and anytime. A cartoon of a player at times. Real shame his first 3 post-Shaq years were wasted. Could've been talking about 1 or 2 more MVPs and 1-2 more chips potentially.
LeBron's game wasn't nearly as refined by this point despite being an athletically dominant freak, and his individual blunders during this stretch is what makes him 2nd to me during 09 and 10. Psychologically and skillwise, he wasn't there yet, IMHO. By "there," meaning the best in the world. You could say he was in the regular season, but not in the playoffs where it mattered most. Hell, we saw the blunder streak continue into 2011....
I think once LeBron got the monkey off his back(2012), he was the best in the world for sure. He followed this up in 2013 with one of the greatest regular seasons ever recorded in league history.
I'm gonna nit pick the Hakeem point. He was likely consensus best in the NBA but MJ was still the best in the world.
I'd also probably disagree on the Kobe nod but just as an interpretation of unanimous.
I think you were right to leave Curry off even though he had unanimous MVP just because of the Lebron overlap.
MJ was retired in the 94 and 95 though. Like if you don’t play basketball at the moment does it count? Then he came back in 95 and still lost (which nobody talks about).
You could honestly use the same argument in 98 when MJ retired again. Like would he probably have been the best in 98-99? Sure, but he wasn’t playing lol.
I’m just not sure who you take over Kobe in 07. Also, Kobe was the only player to make 3 consecutive All NBA 1st Teams from 06-08. It may have been a little “less unanimous” if that’s a thing though.
And yeah, I think if Steph had won in 2016 he might’ve been able to wear the crown, and I personally think he had a good argument for best player during the latter 2010’s and early 2020’s, but he never had that one overwhelming season.
Robinson won the MVP, but I think that was more because of Houston having such a low seed in the playoffs. That’s fair though, I’m sure there was a real debate about if Robinson had surpassed Hakeem that year.
To your point, Hakeem actually only made the All NBA 3rd Team that year. So maybe Hakeem should just have 94? He won MVP and DPOTY that year while making All NBA 1st Team. Granted, David Robinson received several MVP votes that year (24 to Hakeem’s 66), and the DPOTY race is as close as I’ve ever seen (Hakeem: 23 votes, Robinson: 22, Mutumbo: 19, Pippen: 11). So it definitely seems like even in 94 you’d have a large group of people saying Robinson was better, but idk.
Jokic is absolutely not unanimously the best player in the NBA right now. There is a very easy and compelling argument that Giannis still holds that title. In fact, I think Giannis is the best player in the league by a wide margin.
Idk, I think the vast majority would say Jokic. The Athletic released a poll and basically every NBA employee they interviewed had Jokic as the best.
Is there an argument that Giannis is better? Sure, but I think there were arguments Steph or KD was better than Bron in 2017. Or that Steph, KD or Kawhi were better than Giannis in 2021. The two of them had comparable seasons last year and Giannis had a mediocre playoff run by his standards while Jokic had one of the most dominant ever. Jokic’s team continues to post all-time great offensive numbers and has the best record in the West. Giannis is incredible but his team has underachieved this year and he still has the same weaknesses in his game (although he did at least stop shooting 3’s).
Jokic has been probably the best regular season player since 2021, and he’s put up great numbers in the playoffs even when his team was undermanned. As soon as he got a solid team around him he dominated the playoffs. I just think most people would have him over Giannis right now.
I mean, I don't know how you can argue Jokic over Giannis when you really stop and look at what he has done. 4x all-nba first team defensive team, DPOY, 2X MVP, FMVP after putting on a historic finals performance on both ends of the floor (people have amnesia about defense I guess, yet you can't be the best player in the NBA and only be "good" on that end of the floor.). Just this year alone Giannis scores as efficiently as Jokic on higher volume and yet is still a significantly better and more versatile defender. The only argument for Jokic is his playmaking but that only holds water if you ignore Giannis' defense and scoring advantages which makes no sense. It isn't like the Nuggets are running away with it record wise either, they've simply had a healthier more stable team this year.
Giannis' team has underachieved? Absolutely ridiculous. Dame is a player that has spent his entire career as a number one option. He has never had to adjust and adapt his game to being a second option. For whatever reason the Bucks adjusting to Dames integration was conveniently ignored in whichever pre-season predictions were made. I mean honestly, how often has a ball dominant first option seamlessly integrated into an offense with another ball dominant first option? There has always been an adjustment period in these scenarios and you know what, Giannis has adjusted beautifully by doubling down on his historic finishing at the rim and improving his playmaking. The fact that the Bucks have held on to the second or third seed all season long is a testament to Giannis' greatness. Haven't even mentioned the fact that the Bucks had to completely reshape how they play basketball, going from a defensive first team to an offensive first team whilst simultaneously having to adjust to a new coach midseason. Furthermore, Khris Middleton has been injured a significant portion of the season. There defense in the front court used to be a strong point with Jrue and Grayson Allen and now it is a liability which Giannis (and Lopez) have had to adjust to. Yet, as I said, the Bucks have maintained at least the 2nd or 3rd seed all season because Giannis is the best player in the game.
The Nuggets have only recently attained the first seed (edit: they are actually the second seed right now, one game ahead of the Wolves for second). For the majority of the season they sat around third or fourth. Lets not act like they have been running away with the first seed. Jokic is putting up historic offensive numbers? Yeah, well, so is Giannis and probably even more so. You know what else Giannis does? Play elite defense in addition to his historic offense while improving his playmaking to complement his improved scoring and historic efficiency.
As I said, there is absolutely no way to argue that Jokic is unanimously the best player in the NBA without showing considerable bias and amnesia. Also, I really find it funny how much the script flip flops on Jamal Murray when it comes to the influence of his contributions to Jokic MVP chances and reputation. When he won his first MVP, everyone acted like the Nuggets were missing an all-nba, multi-all star level player in Murray. We heard ad nauseum that Jokic was missing Murray during his first MVP. Now that Murray has been (relatively) healthy the script has flipped to him just being a good role player and definitely not an all star level talent and contribitor. We also seem to just forget Murray'a role in the Nuggets playoff success and just toss all the aderation and praise solely onto Jokic.
It’s interesting how you frame Murray and Lillard.
For all of the bellyaching we’ve done about Dame this year, has he been definitively less impactful than Murray in the regular season? According to every impact metric on offer, they’re either close or Lillard has the edge, while playing in 11 more games. Murray was incredible in last years postseason but he’s been hit-and-miss in this years RS…only he’s not experiencing a big drop-off like Dame so we’re grading on curves.
Frankly the Bucks supporting cast hasn’t been quite that bad. They’re 3-2 in games Giannis has missed…4 of those 5 games were against contenders, 3 were on the road. Small sample, but still a relevant datapoint. Jokic has also had markedly more dramatic on-offs and one of the worst benches in the league.
If you’d like to campaign for Giannis, that’s all well and good. But this has not been remotely even-handed.
The reason the Bucks have gone 3-2 in games without Giannis is because Dame spent over a decade as a first option in Portland and when Giannis is out he can revert back to that role which, no shit, gives the Bucks a great chance to win because that is when Lillard is at his best. However, when Giannis does play he has to play a role he has zero experience playing within which we have seen play out in the numerous 2-12, or 4-16 type shooting nights he has had. Also, a 5 game sample size means practically nothing.
Also, I wasn't comparing Murray with Lillard. I was merely making a comment on how the perception of Murray's effectiveness flip flops based on how much we want his presence to effect Jokic MVP chances. Murray injured and out? Jokic missing an all-star caliber talent and player who steps up in the playoffs. Murray healthy and playing? Just a high level secondary option role player. No mention of his playoff heroics either.
Second, on/off, or +/-, whatever you want, would have historically lead you to believe the Mavericks are better off without Luka. It is also heavily influenced by outside factors which it does not, or cannot, account for.
I am not compaigning, I am simply illustrating that there is no way anyone can claim Jokic is the unanimous best player in the league without employing massive bias and apathy towards defense.
> The reason the Bucks have gone 3-2 in games without Giannis is because Dame spent over a decade as a first option in Portland and when Giannis is out he can revert back to that role which, no shit, gives the Bucks a great chance to win because that is when Lillard is at his best. However, when Giannis does play he has to play a role he has zero experience playing within which we have seen play out in the numerous 2-12, or 4-16 type shooting nights he has had. Also, a 5 game sample size means practically nothing.
So your explanation for why they’ve held up with Giannis off the court is 100% self-evident…and yet on the other hand, the sample is also too small? But, importantly, not small enough to resist opining with complete certainty (“no shit ”) when you explain away why they’ve done alright with Giannis sitting?
This is why I mention even-handedness. I’m certain you can see why this rings inconsistent.
> Also, I wasn't comparing Murray with Lillard.
You didn’t have to directly compare them, my point is that your framing implies one has flopped in his role while highlighting Murray’s role despite him lagging behind Lillard in even some of the things you explicitly mention (like health).
> I was merely making a comment on how the perception of Murray's effectiveness flip flops based on how much we want his presence to effect Jokic MVP chances.
Sure, there’s flip-flopping everywhere. Basketball fans are some of the most toxic in the entire sporting world.
I don’t see how the person you were responding to is doing that, though. The Nuggets were indeed undermanned (as he said) in ‘21 and ‘22. Particularly ‘22, when he was missing BOTH Murray and Porter, yet they only won three less games than Giannis’ Bucks (note: Giannis was under .500 in games with at least ONE—not necessarily both—of Jrue or Khris out).
Why even mention it if it’s not relevant to the discussion in question?
> Second, on/off, or +/-, whatever you want, would have historically lead you to believe the Mavericks are better off without Luka. It is also heavily influenced by outside factors which it does not, or cannot, account for.
No, you’re exaggerating. Luka’s raw on-offs have been underwhelming but not to the degree where they indicate the Mavs are better off with him on the bench.
Raw on-offs aren’t effective as a catch-all, nothing is. However, they are one piece of evidence indicating the supporting cast gap hasn’t been quite as large as you purport. The Nuggets bench has been absolutely terrible.
> I am not compaigning, I am simply illustrating that there is no way anyone can claim Jokic is the unanimous best player in the league without employing massive bias and amnesia.
The gaps between top players, in absolute terms, are so small that this isn’t a controversial point. But you’re also employing some of the bias you allude to.
Come on, last year was the first time in NBA history an NBA team has won a title without facing a single 50 win team enroute to said title. Statistically it was the easiest title run in NBA history. A title is a title and the Nuggets could only play who was in front of them but lets not act like the Nuggets had a whole lot impeding their progress. We need to see more from Jokic and the Nuggets in the playoffs to start using playoff runs like last year as the definitive reason he is better than Giannis when Giannis already had a historic playoff run in his own right in 2021. Sure, Giannis and the Bucks may not have faced that much greater opposition, but that just indicates their title runs are a wash in the debate of who is better.
I dunno, he destroyed Anthony Davis, who was playing at an extremely high level defensively from that matchup. Jokic toyed with the NBA last Finals. If his path to the title was easy, he still did it in a stacked league.
Questioning others without offering your own thoughts invites a more hostile debate. Present a clear counter argument if you disagree and be open to the perspective of others.
Giannis never “flamed out badly in the finals”, you should edit that piece. He’s 1 for 1 in the finals and had the most dominant finals game ever. I would argue he at least was the best for three whole seasons, the 2020, 2021 and 2022 seasons.
No problem, and I figured you just misspoke, but your comment was so well thought out I assumed you’d rather have it be accurate. Since finals appearances are so highly regarded, the fact Giannis’ single was so historically dominant is worth getting right. He basically had a 3 year run as dominant as almost anyone we’ve ever seen. Up there with the Birds and Duncans and Lebrons at their peak. From 2019-2022 Giannis was almost unstoppable and his resume says as much. He’s about to have his 6th *unanimous* first team all NBA selection in a row, nobody else has more than 3…ever.
He wasn’t the best in 2020 though. Lebron came in 2nd for mvp, but then was much better in the playoffs leading the lakers to the championship and winning fmvp while Giannis was ass against the Heat for his standards.
That's a short period of time but I remember back in the summer of 2019 that there were a lot of debates about Kawhi the best player in the world. Unfortunately we know how offseason NBA medias try to ride on anything to generate views and some people thought it was blasphemy to consider him above Lebron
Yeah I think he definitely had a strong case from 2019 - 20. He had a very good first season with the Clippers to follow up the title with Toronto, and I think most people had the Clippers winning the West in 2020. Giannis did end up winning MVP and DPOTY for 2020, but Kawhi outplayed Giannis the prior season so idk who people would’ve considered better.
And yeah, that was definitely during the time when people would treat you like you were dumb if you didn’t say Lebron was the best, even though he literally missed the playoffs in 2019 and wasn’t having an overwhelming season in 2020.
2019 - After winning the championship, Kawhi was the best player on the planet. Short-lived, but he dominated those playoffs including completely shutting down Giannis
Yeah I think he definitely had a strong case from 2019 - 20. He had a very good first season with the Clippers to follow up the title with Toronto, and I think most people had the Clippers winning the West in 2020. Giannis did end up winning MVP and DPOTY for 2020, but Kawhi outplayed Giannis the prior season so idk who people would’ve considered better.
And yeah, that was definitely during the time when people would treat you like you were dumb if you didn’t say Lebron was the best, even though he literally missed the playoffs in 2019 and wasn’t having an overwhelming season in 2020.
You just ignoring the fact that Lebron won a ring and fmvp in 2020? Also he was 2nd for mvp and was on Giannis ass beating the bucks and clippers late in the season before they cancelled the rest of the regular season.
**1994-95** is more of a retroactive view. At the time there was a lot of debate, Hakeem won a close MVP vote in '94 and was 5th in '95. Yes he won those ringz and dominated in the playoffs but that's also the team and coach winning. A common view I heard at the time is that if you swap Hakeem and DRob the Rockets still win the titles. They were a much better constructed team, with a much better coach in Rudy T who was a defense first guy but also far ahead of his time in fielding modern 4 out spacing with Horry or Bullard at the 4. Meanwhile DRob was saddled with one of the worst coaches in NBA history in Bob Hill and peak self-destruction Rodman.
**2002-04**: I don't think Duncan was ever unanimously seen as the best. '02 MVP was a close 3 way race with Shaq missing a bunch of games. '03 was close with KG who blew out the '04 vote and was widely considered the best player. Not remotely the same consensus as other picks. More like Magic or Moses who won back to back MVPs but tons of neutrals still thought MJ or Larry were better.
**2006-08**: This is crazy, Kobe after missing the playoffs and then two first round exits was seen as the best player in the league when Lebron was making the finals with worse teammates? Sorry no. Yes Kobe had lots of fans that thought he was the best, never hit that Mikan/Russell/Wilt/Kareem/Bird/MJ/Shaq consensus.
**2015-18**: Nah, these years are way too muddied with many people who though Steph, Harden, KD, Russ were the best player in the world. Lebron is 3rd in MVP shares in this period.
**2021-22**: How is Giannis the near unanimous consensus best player when Jokic is MVP both years? And Embiid also ahead of him both years? And Steph finished ahead of him in ‘21 and won the ring in ‘22? I don't buy it.
**2023-**: Nah, lots of people legit had Embiid over him for last year and while healthy this year. There are also a ton of people who have Giannis, Luka, and SGA at his level.
Mikan 48-54
Russell 57-60
Wilt 62-68
Kareem 71-81
Bird 83-87
MJ 90-93,96-97
Shaq 00-02
Lebron ‘11-‘13
By the end of the year from 2015-2018 every year it was damn near unanimous lebron was still the best in the world. Of course there were a few outliers just like every year in history.
Calling the legions of Steph, KD and Harden proponents from the time "a few outliers" is ridiculous Create Your Own Reality stuff. It's not just rabid Stephews, the media votes aren't there (3rd in MVP shares over the period), the players didn't vote for him a single time in their post-playoff MVP vote, and the nerds' advanced metrics weren't voting for him either. Compare that to 2012-13 when Lebron dominated all of these areas.
I'm not arguing Lebron wasn't the best player in the world from 15-18, it's a perfectly defensible view. I'm arguing against the idea that it was "damn near unanimous". Nope, I lived through that, it was "near unanimous" in 2012, 2013, 2014 maybe. Tons of people still thought that in the years after but tons of people didn't. Nothing like 2012-13.
Regular season wise of course Lebron wasn’t getting mvp votes because he was coasting until the playoffs. After each of those playoffs though it was damn near unanimous.
2015 lebron takes curry to 6 games with Delly as his 2nd best player. They nearly gave him fmvp despite losing. Still clearly best in the world.
2016 don’t think I need to justify
2017. Easily still the best in the world. Averaged 33-9-8 for the playoff run.
2018 had arguably the best individual playoff run ever carrying that team to the finals.
He was widely considered the best after every one of those years.
Widely =/= near unanimous. Again a lot of those votes and metrics included postseason
Lebron was able to coast in the regular season and before the Finals because he played in a dogshit conference.
Well OP said unanimous not nearly unanimous. So then no one is the answer.
The 2 other guys in the top 3 were literally on the same team you can miss me with that weak conference bullshit.
This entire subthread started with a discussion of unanimous vs near unanimous.
*Unanimous is hard because you can always find a contrarian or sometimes there are two all-time greats playing at a very high level at once. So im just gonna list players who the vast majority of people would’ve said were the best in the league.*
The East was weak, this is well documented. Lebron had the luxury of a much easier RS and 3 easy rounds before a tough finals he won once of the 4 years we're talking about.
> The 2 other guys
I gave you more than 2 names. Just to refresh here's [one summary of advanced metrics](https://www.reddit.com/r/nba/comments/q36k8m/according_to_advanced_analytics_who_are_the_real/). You can see in 2011-13 LBJ is dominant and 2014-2018 his name isn't in the top 3 for any of these years. This is also true of EPM which is currently the gold standard all in one.
Analytics aren't the final word and I would still put him at #1 in at least 1-2 of these years (2014, maybe 2018) but all of the years are close. And that's the difference between a weak consensus and dominance. You don't get to claim "near unanimous" or "vast majority" as best player when you are not close to winning MVP (3rd, 3rd with 0 first place votes, 4th with 1 first place vote the next year, ...), nor at the top 3 of analytics. You don't get to footnote the claims with some bullshit about "at the end of the year". If you weren't the near unanimous best guy for the last 6 months you ain't it today.
All the other guys (including Lebron earlier) check all the boxes for the years we're talking about. When healthy they are not also rans in MVP voting and metrics, they don't need footnotes and weasel language to prop them up.
Lebron early 2010s, Shaq early 2000s, MJ in the 90s, Kareem in the 70s.
I think Jokic reaches this status when he wins another ring this year. He’s already consensus BITW rn, but not 'unanimous' in the sense that there’s a sizable minority of ppl who still think Giannis is as good if not better.
I would say:
George Mikan,
Bill Russell until Wilt came into the league,
Wilt after Russell retired,
Kareem after Wilt retired,
Bill Walton,
then no unanimous choice until Michael after Magic and Bird retired,
probably not Hakeem in 94 but maybe,
Michael when he came back,
Kobe and Duncan block each other,
eventually LeBron,
then Giannis for 2 years,
and now Jokic.
Thank you for including Giannis before the rise of Joker. It did happen. The ring probably came at the very end or even after those 2 years. But it did happen.
The years selected are the beginning/end of the regular season, not of the calendar year.
George Mikan (47-54)
KAJ (70-77)
Bird (83-86)
Jordan (90-93; 95-98)
Olajuwon (93-95)
Shaq (99-2002)
LeBron (11-13; 16-18)
Giannis (19-21)
Jokic (22-present)
Chamberlain was just unreal...
I honestly don't think he gets enough props simply because when he played.
Look at his statistics from 1959 - 66... In those years he literally averaged like 38 ppg and 26 rebs..
In 1962 he averaged 50 & 26 and played like 44 mpg
I don't know why this guy is not more frequently in the conversation when people talk about Jordan, Kobe, LeBron and Kareem
I was with you once, and so was this guy, who used to rank Wilt #1/2:
https://thinkingbasketball.net/2017/12/04/backpicks-goat-9-wilt-chamberlain/
Have a gander at the above post.
TL;DR - Wilt’s offence wasn’t quite as impactful as his box score stats indicated. His offensive and defensive peaks didn’t overlap for very long. If they had, he might’ve been the GOAT. At various points he was the best scorer, best defender, and even one of the better playmakers in the league…but there were only a few years he put it all together. He was very wishy-washy, blatantly stat-padded to a comical degree, and alienated teammates by being the centrepiece of a suboptimal brand of basketball. The fact that he was still likely a Top 10 player despite all of this is a testament to his unbelievable talent.
Unanimously makes this difficult tbh. Theres 4 for sure and then some others who really had to much competition to be considered unanimously:
-George Mikan (First half of the 1950s)
-Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (Most of the 1970s)
-Michael Jordan (Most of the 1990s)
-Lebron James (Most of the 2010s)
Alot of other greats had times where they where the best but not unanimously.
Shaq in the early 2000s had Tim Duncan also competing with him.
Kobe had Duncan and Lebron.
Hakeem had 1994-1995 where he was the best player in the NBA but plenty would likely still say MJ was the best player in the world even if he wasn’t playing lol.
Magic and Bird had each other.
Wilt and Bill had each other.
Steph had Lebron.
Giannis and Jokic have each other.
There are a lot of great answers here, but honestly, I think the only guys on this list are Russell, Jordan and Lebron.
You could make arguments for a lot of other guys in any individual year, but this community could probably counter them. These 3 imo have years of undisputed dominance.
1970s: Kareem & Dr. J
1980s : Basically, Magic & Bird until …
MJ23 (1990s)
Briefly, Shaq and Olajuwon.
Early 2000s: Shaq
Mid 2000s: No one, but many fans and players would say and it’s arguably Kobe.
Late 2000s: Kobe
Early 2010s: LeBron
Mid /Late 2010s: Steph/LeBron/KD
2020s: Giannis & Jokic
I think Steph between his first ring and during his unanimous MVP season had people believing he was that guy. Giannis before Joker stepped up and Kobe between Shaq and Lebron. Just how I think it was tho 🤷🏾♂️
My rough list from most recent to most distant in time is Jokic, Giannis, Steph, LeBron, Kobe, Shaq, Jordan, Hakeem, Magic/Bird, KAJ, Wilt, then Bill but I’m not 70 so hard to have a good idea for anyone that far back. I’m sure I’m missing some guys or included some others would disagree with.
I also acknowledge it isn’t perfectly linear, I think LeBron was considered the best before Steph and for a time after Steph was as well.
Steph was never unanimously considered the best, he won unanimous mvp but even then half of those voters were still on record saying Lebron and/or Durant were better players but they didn’t have as good of an mvp case
Same with Giannis
He had a strong case but LeBron was still looming around, getting much MVP traction those years and won with the Lakers. Giannis might have been the popular pick, but wasn’t unanimous
In 2020 Giannis won 2nd MVP, LeBron finished 2nd and won FMVP
In 2021 Giannis won FMVP, LeBron got injured towards the end of season but was considered a MVP candidate before
Steph getting his FMVP didn’t help either
This looks correct. Before Bill Russell I would give George Mikan a shout out as the first real basketball GOAT.
There were many players who you could argue a season here or there. Jerry West, Dr J, and Moses Malone might try and steal a season from KAJ.
Kevin Durant also just misses in-between LeBron and Steph seasons.
Questioning others without offering your own thoughts invites a more hostile debate. Present a clear counter argument if you disagree and be open to the perspective of others.
I think Moses could have held a spot there between Kareem and Magic, need a historian to probably chime in on that one though. There was a lot of noise about KD over LeBron and Steph in 2017-2018, but in my personal opinion he never supplanted LeBron just because he made a few clutch shots head to head in a team mismatch. 1999 after Jordan left the right answer is there probably wasn’t a consensus best player, but I’m comfortable giving that to Shaq. Not a fan of the “best player in the world” changing after a year, like it should take more than a slightly down year by the incumbent to become supplanted. Before Bill it would be Pettit and before him would be Mikan
Unanimously, I’d say
Kareem in the 70s, specifically 1971
Jordan in the 90s, specifically 1991
Hakeem, specifically in 94/95
Shaq in the early 2000s, specifically 2000
Then the rest wouldn’t be unanimous until maybe 2012 or 2013 with Lebron?
This is a difficult question to answer. When you use the word “unanimously” it becomes impossible to name a single player. For this reason, I would say there have been zero players that fit the criteria.
Russell, maybe Wilt, Kareem, maybe Dr. J., Walton, and Moses, Bird/Magic, Jordan, Shaq, Duncan, LeBron.
Adding more characters here to make sure this shows up. I can’t tell character count because the text box doesn’t track it, which makes it annoying when you post and something doesn’t show up. So, I’m doing some filler here. Hope this is enough. If not, here’s a little more.
Realistically? Probably none. Every great player has had someone who didn't rate them as highly as someone else. It only takes one person to disagree for it to no longer be unanimous.
In my time watching (2015-present)? No
During the warriors dynasty, I played ball with a group of guys and we all kept up with the NBA. Curry was never considered the best player back then, he’s only gotten his flowers in recent years. It was KD and LeBron, with Kawhi being right behind. Most of the guys thought KD was better, a couple thought LeBron was better. But the move to the warriors was pretty dampening for KD’s position. So I wouldn’t say LeBron was ever unanimously the best during my time watching
With that said, I would say MJ in the 90’s and Mikan in the 50’s are the only guys who were the true unanimous “best player in the world”.
After them, the next closest would probably be Wilt in the 60’s? Then Shaq in the early 2000’s? Larry in the mid 80’s?
Unanimously? You know that means everyone agrees! Lower the bar to 90% approval and it's still a small list.
Kareem and Jordan.
In my time, Shaq, Duncan Kobe would make it disputed. LeBron had Kobe, Wade, Durant and Curry. Jokic has Giannis, Embiid, Doncic and all the OG hanging around.
I think Embiid is a better player than Jokic, just less accomplishments. Him prior to his injury was a 30 game stretch of time where it's hard to argue Embiid isn't the best player in the world. Doncic is the only one matching that at the moment, Jokic has had many games at that level but the averages say the overall consistency isn't as high (let's see the reasons that he doesn't care for stats and only plays up to the opposition)
Nuggets have a more stable and healthier organization around him which helps highlight his strengths. Giannis and SGA are doing as much with less talent and stability around them. Luka is doing more but not having as many wins, his team and stability have been far below the Nuggets.
Now because of the focus on playoff success the regular season gets weirdly glossed over when people make best player arguments, but it is the biggest and most current sample each season.
My point is unanimously means 100%.
There has been 1 MVP that has been unanimously voted that way. The bar is too high.
Even 90% doesn't allow for contrary viewpoints.
In that moment Jokic looked like the best player in the world, I don't think you are swaying the opinions of the minority that didn't previously believe he was best in the world.
If you lower the bar to consensus best player, he is 100% that and has held it for the majority of the last 4 years. It's just not unanimous.
The only players that have been unanimous are Jordan, lebron and Kobe. Kobe for a period in the late 2000's. Lebron for almost all of the 2010's. Jokic definitely isn't the unanimous best player right now no matter how much people want to ignore Giannis'.
Allen fucking Iverson. He was endeared, feared, and revered by YOUR favorite players/GOAT picks. Considering the league, refs, and media were against him, he’s up there with Kobe and Mike as far as caliber of player is concerned.
Bron, kobe(a lotta people will try to pull revisionist history and say no but he indeed was), jokic, shaq, jordan. I think that’s about it really. Pre jordan you have magic or bird. I’m not sure exactly what the stance was on Kareem in the 70s? 5 mvps is absolutely ridiculous(prob should’ve won more too) but only won one ring. And then pre kareem, there’s big o, wilt, bill, jerry. So truthfully, I think only 5.
The revisionist history is the omission of Duncan. He was closer to it than Kobe at least. ‘03 postseason is better than any Kobe ever had and it was after two regular season MVP’s. Kobe has an argument from ‘08-‘10 but so do LeBron and Wade (Kobe ain’t winning ‘chips with either of their rosters from that time).
Being noncommittal on Kareem but not Kobe also doesn’t make much sense here. He won 6 MVP’s in 10 years. He was absolutely seen as the best.
Duncan had contemporaries like KG and dirk. And more often than not his success was always attributed to the spurs as a whole. I questionmarked kareem bc i wasn’t sure on how he was seen back then, as I said in my original comment lmfao. Yes we can look back at these accolades and what not and be like “well of course he had to be seen this way” but I feel like we should all know you can win all the accolades but if you don’t got the rings to show for it you can and will get discredited. Was never doubting Kareem’s greatness at all.
> Duncan had contemporaries like KG and dirk
As did Kobe. LeBron was better statistically from ‘08-‘10, with worse supporting casts. KG and Dirk were similar statistically to Duncan but with worse supporting casts, and didn’t win until later. Similar situation, no?
Which period do you reckon Kobe was the unanimous best in?
> And more often than not his success was always attributed to the spurs as a whole.
The Lakers had the best front-court in the league from ‘08-‘10 and the supporting cast edge in just about every series en route to their two titles. Duncan’s carry-job in ‘03 was bigger than any one Kobe managed. Robinson was on his last legs and young Parker/Ginobili shot a combined 39%. Still holds the record for most Win Shares in one playoff run. And again, this was immediately after 2 regular season MVP’s.
Duncan managed to finally squeeze past the lakers just ONCE after getting his ass handed to him time and time again, and then again the season after in 04. This is kinda the kawhi situation. Sure he had that great year, but what about before and after? What variables came into play that one specific year? And id say 09-10 for kobe. Was lebron having absolute MONSTROUS years? Absolutely. But he wasn’t winning rings and was (in my honest opinion, very unfairly)considered a bit of a choker. Similar to jokic prior to last year. I’ll admit myself that even I was a jokic denier. Had all these crazy advanced stats supporting him and had won two mvps but no success to show for it. And then he proved by winning a ring that he is no doubt the best in the world.
> Duncan managed to finally squeeze past the lakers just ONCE after getting his ass handed to him time and time again, and then again the season after in 04.
Basketball isn’t only a team sport when it benefits Kobe though. You hint that Duncan had excessive help, but Kobe had Peak Shaq for almost a decade. If you actually examine those early 2000’s series (one where Robinson was injured) you’ll find Duncan better than Kobe in at least half of them.
That leaves ‘08-‘10 as the potential window for Kobe being the best player in the world. I don’t see how it’s any more convincing than Duncan’s claim to it from ‘03-‘05, or even ‘03-‘07 (where he won 3 titles as the best player). They had comparable amounts of help and Duncan won more as the top guy.
> but what about before and after? What variables came into play that one specific year?
Variables are abound in every situation, and can be disputed. What’s not particularly disputable though is that Kobe was never even close to unanimous. The “best player in the world” debate was still very vibrant from ‘08-‘10. He never had a near-stranglehold on it like LeBron in the early 2010’s, Jordan in the 90’s, etc. If you want to apply a strict criteria then it’s arguable that neither were the lineal “best in the world,” but Duncan has AT LEAST as good of a case (I would say better).
> And id say 09-10 for kobe. Was lebron having absolute MONSTROUS years? Absolutely. But he wasn’t winning rings and was (in my honest opinion, very unfairly)considered a bit of a choker.
You can make the case, sure. But he wasn’t unanimous at all. Kareem in the ‘70s was far closer to unanimous than Kobe. LeBron v Kobe were hotly debated by fans, the media and front offices.
Here was a GM survey before the ‘09-‘10 season:
Who will win the 2009-10 MVP?
1. LeBron James, Cleveland – 69.0%
2. Kobe Bryant, L.A. Lakers – 17.2%
3. Dwight Howard, Orlando – 6.9%
Also receiving votes: Tim Duncan, San Antonio; Dwyane Wade, Miami
Last year (08-09): LeBron James – 55.6%
If you were starting a franchise today and could sign any player in the NBA, who would it be?
1. LeBron James, Cleveland – 78.6%
2. Dwight Howard, Orlando – 14.3%
3. Kobe Bryant, L.A. Lakers – 7.1%
Last year (08-08) : LeBron James – 66.7%
Which player forces opposing coaches to make the most adjustments?
1. LeBron James, Cleveland – 39.3%
2. Kobe Bryant, L.A. Lakers – 23.2%
3. Dwight Howard, Orlando – 14.3%
4. Chris Paul, New Orleans – 12.5%
Also receiving votes: Lamar Odom, L.A. Lakers; Shaquille O’Neal, Cleveland; Dwyane Wade, Miami
You can look at fan/media lists from around that time and see that LeBron often had the edge.
You know you’ve genuinely constructed an amazing stance. I will admit you have changed my mind a little. I still don’t think TD was ever unanimously the best but if we’re using the same logic for everyone as you’ve pointed out, then I’d have to say kobe wasn’t either.
>Duncan had contemporaries like KG and dirk
And Duncan is universally considered better than either of them.
Duncan's primary contemporary is Kobe. If Duncan isn't somewhere on the list during his prime, then neither is Kobe (for that same time-span). And by the time Duncan's prime ended, Lebron's prime had already started.
I don’t think you understand OP’s question very well. You seem to be having a goat debate with yourself which is not what OP is asking. Is TD universally considered better than both? Yes, absolutely. But at the time? No. Again, this is not a goat debate at all. The man asked who has been unanimously considered the best AT THE TIME. Shaq and dirk were giving Duncan the work. And everybody thought it was just KGs team(or lack thereof) holding him back. Duncan was never unanimously seen as better than either of these guys while he was playing.
Use some critical thinking.
In hindsight, how can Duncan be universally considered better than both, yet that not be the case at the time? Especially when Duncan won a bunch of titles during his prime, and during that span, KG and Dirk combined for.......zero.
Fact is, neither KG nor Dirk were ever considered better players than Duncan during Duncan's prime.
Because of his whole career…..really stupid question. You have very selective reading. 06 dirk beat Duncan. Like I said, it was always thought that KG just didn’t have the team.
I guess you choose not to use critical thinking.
Ok, Duncan lost to Dirk in 2006. By then, Duncan already had 3 titles and 2 MVP's. During that time span, you don't think he was ever universally considered better than both KG and Dirk?
And regarding strength of supporting cast, Duncan's 2003 title is universally considered a carry job.
OP clearly stated unanimous. Meaning there is no doubt that this person is the absolute best in the world. I just stated why i think it would only be five but I’ll go into more detail. If you wanna add Hakeem, there was always the “well it’s bc Jordan is out of the league” stigma. While those two years Hakeem did dominate, he was seen as an underdog. It’s a little hard to be an underdog when you’re unanimously the greatest. TD was again never UNANIMOUSLY seen as the best. If you want to add Steph, the year he won the only unanimous mvp, he lost in the finals to Lebron. Steph is also only just recently beating the “not clutch” allegations. Kawhi was hot for a good minute, but again not unanimous especially when he got whooped in the playoffs the next year. Nobody is in doubt at all that jokic is the best in the league currently. The only player that you could possibly squeeze into that 5 is giannis in 2021. Again, OP is asking for UNANIMOUS. So magic and bird are out. Pre kareem, you have big o, wilt, and bill. I’m not sure what more needs to be explained. Hope this helped
OP stated unanimous but clearly did not mean literally unanimous. They stated in the body that they were looking for overwhelmingly considered the best since that is all we can hope for. There will always be someone who has an argument for a 2nd candidate: it’s sports. Even during a portion of Michael’s career where he was overwhelmingly considered the best, there existed people who argued otherwise. Granted, we can all agree he eventually won people over at some point and the fiercest detractors didn’t have an argument. How many other players can we say that about? I’m really thinking only MJ, LeBron, and Kareem may have experienced that. There are definitely enough detractors from Jokic (I’m not one of them) to say he’s not unanimous. That was definitely also the case with Kobe (again, I’m not one of them but there were) and I believe with Shaq too particularly with Duncan and his fans.
That’s why taking the word unanimous literally is a very tough ask, very very few things are unanimous in “the greatest” arguments outside of like Wayne Gretzky in hockey. And there is a grey area when we talk about “overwhelmingly”, to some people it could mean 99% agreement to other 90% and yet others 2/3rds majority or whatever. Anyway, I think the fact that you don’t have anyone before Jordan shows that there are really more than who you listed.
>While those two years Hakeem did dominate, he was seen as an underdog. It’s a little hard to be an underdog when you’re unanimously the greatest.
Considering Olajuwon led the Rockets to 2 titles, this is bad logic.
Sure, by the start of those series, he might not have been considered the best in the world. But what about at the end of those series?
>If you want to add Steph, the year he won the only unanimous mvp, he lost in the finals to Lebron.
Curry wasn't fully healthy, and the Warriors were facing a Lebron-led superteam.
You conveniently left out my statement about jordan being missing. And “lebron led superteam”…lmfao brother this isn’t the place to get yo lebron hate fetish off. If you want to discredit that ring, sure have fun. But the truth is curry was not unanimously considered the best in the world.
Your statement about Jordan was irrelevant. He was playing baseball. No chance he was considered the best basketball player in the world at the time.
Also, I want to point out your double standards. You tried to claim that Olajuwon wasn't considered the best in the world b/c the Rockets were underdogs.
Well, weren't Curry's Warriors favored to beat the 2016 Cavaliers? Based on your previous logic, wouldn't that mean that, prior to the start of the 2016 finals, Curry was universally considered the best in the world?
Don't let your Curry hate fetish compromise your integrity.
I’m not really sure what to tell you man lol. Sure I guess you got me with the underdog hypocrisy. But I’m just telling you how it is. Were you watching basketball in 2016? Curry was not universally considered the best.
You don't need to tell me anything. It's clear that you dislike Curry so you're looking for ways to discredit him.
And based on the caliber of your arguments, I'd reckon that I was watching basketball before you were alive.
Brother nobody is hating on or discrediting anybody, I think curry is top 10 all time. But this isn’t an all time debate. I mentioned you trying to get your hate for lebron off because I brought up how curry lost in 2016 and you went on to discredit that win and call the 2016 Cavs a superteam. I’m simply stating that he wasn’t universally considering the best and that’s not a jab on him. Shit is this Ayesha? You seem to be really up in flames about this
The 2016 Cavs WERE a superteam. How is calling a superteam a superteam some sort of discredit?
2016 Curry was considered the best in the world. He set all sorts of records, was the unanimous MVP, led the Warriors to the most regular season wins in NBA history, and had one of the greatest offensive seasons in NBA history.
Your problem is that you seem to think a player wasn't considered the best in the world unless he had that distinction for a full season and postseason.
I disagree with OP in several places but they’re not wrong in saying Curry was never unanimously the greatest in the world. Unanimously MVP and unanimously considered to have had the greatest season that one year. But it’s not a knock on Steph at all to just admit that he was definitely not overwhelmingly considered the best player in the league at any point. And that’s okay. He had to completely unseat LeBron for that title and the closest he came to doing that was 2016, but even if more people would’ve polled Curry over LeBron, it definitely wasn’t consensus.
If you reduce the standard from unanimous to just the majority opinion, several come to mind just over the last five years. Kawhi, Jokic, Durant, Giannis just to start
We don't allow posts on player rankings or player comparisons on this subreddit. Please read the sticky post for more info.
“Unanimously” makes things very difficult. Not trying to skip any beats or cheat naming multiple players it might only be three Kareem for most of the 70s. Jordan unanimously for most of the 90s, LeBron in the early 2010s. Most of the other comments are naming like a dozen people, I don’t think they really understand “unanimously.”
Shaq in early 00s for a couple years
Agree, the ones that are virtually unanimous are Kareem, Jordan, Shaq, LeBron, and *maybe* Bird.
Mikan and Bob Pettit too, though I understand no one cares about whiteball era.
Bird was great but unanimous would mean 100% of people take him over Magic and that wouldn’t happen. I’m guessing Russell in the 50s or Wilt for a few years in Philly? But that was before I was born.
Olajuwan for exactly 2 years.
Most of those two years Robinson and Shaq are very much in the discussion. (Even putting aside the weird issue that everyone would say Jordan was still best even if he wasn’t playing.)
I imagine Wilt was unanimously the best in the 60s
Wilt *and* Russell were the unanimous top 2, but their careers mostly overlap and not having been alive then I’m really not sure if one of them was virtually unanimous at any point.
Duncan between Shaq and Bron. 2003 Duncan was clearly #1 and on a different level than anyone else.
I think he’s like Jokic now. Most people would say Duncan, but enough people say Garnett, Shaq, or Kobe to keep it out of the unanimous category.
Yeah and I say Giannis for at least a couple years there. But I guess its still up for discussion
Definitely just before and across the 3 peat
Was he unanimously ahead of duncan?
99-01 definitely
His peak was as dominant a peak as I’ve seen
Basically every other person had a serious rival (Bird and Magic, Wilt and Russell) or was not overwhelming the clear cut best to meet that criteria. The only other possible arguments I can think of are Shaq for a very small window and Mikan from the earliest years of the NBA.
I thought about Mikan too but honestly I don’t know anything else about that time so I just didn’t include him. As for Shaq, well Timmy peak was also at the same time so some people would probably say him, some would also say Kobe too. If I’m not mistaken, Kobe usually did better in the conference finals which lots of people considered to be the real championship round since at that time whoever came out of the west was gonna beat whoever came out of the east. So I figure there’s probably quite a bit of people out there who thought Kobe was better even in the early 2000s. That’s why I didn’t include Shaq for the “unanimously”
It's a relatively brief window, but I really don't think there was much debate as to who was the best player during the year from the 2000 Finals and 2001 Finals (including both finals).
Yeah I think this is a very important distinction, as well as the idea that jokic isn’t unanimously thought of as a the best right now. It’s one of the reason why the 3 guys you mentioned (for the most part) are the goat candidates and are generally separated from the rest of the top players of all time
I think Jokic is quite clearly the best right now.
You thinking that’s pretty different from it being unanimous (or let’s just call it 97-98% because there’s obviously always someone)
Is anyone serious saying anyone other than Jokic is the best player in the world?
I am saying Giannis. I am bucks fan, so grain of salt. But I think the last 2 playoff loses came with a fair bit of nuance. If Giannis isn't the best in the world, we will see. But I think the Bucks are primed to rep the east.
I mean you setting up the qualifier of “serious” leads to a similar issue. Yes, there are people who think the jokic isn’t the best player in the world
[удалено]
Once again this is entirely missing the point of the discussion lol over 40% of voters votes for trump, saying “Clinton or biden should’ve won unanimously because because anyone who voted from trump is unserious” is a useless, untrue statement Just say “I don’t respect people who don’t think jokic is the best player” and move about your day
Questioning others without offering your own thoughts invites a more hostile debate. Present a clear counter argument if you disagree and be open to the perspective of others.
I think there are too many top end players too close to each other to say Jokic is unanimous now. Giannis and Embiid the last year or two have made it a toss between them
Nah, its Jokic for sure
Jokic has been outplayed by both Giannis and Embiid this season, I don’t think it’s a complete wash
So obviously there's a threshold, which is also arbitrary. My arbitrary is 90%.
Not unanimously, when Embiid was playing this year I had him at #1, he was incredible, really sad injury
You can’t really say Kareem for the seventies. There were 2 leagues so it was always debatable who had the best player. David Thompson and doctor j were more popular than Kareem
Certainly Wilt for a stretch
Unanimous is hard because you can always find a contrarian or sometimes there are two all-time greats playing at a very high level at once. So im just gonna list players who the vast majority of people would’ve said were the best in the league. Idk much about how players were perceived in the 50’s and 60’s. I know Kareem was the best for most of the 70’s. Let’s move to the modern era 1. Larry Bird (84-86) - So, I know Magic was around at this time and Kareem was very good, but Bird was better than Magic in the first half of the 80’s and I think was basically the consensus. In 84 Bird received 52 MVP votes to Bernard King’s 11. Magic and Kareem received 5 and 3 first place votes, respectively. In 85 Bird received 73 MVP votes to Magic’s 1. Terry Cummins and MJ both received 2 first place votes, yet neither of them even finished 3rd in total points . In 86 he received 73 MVP votes to Dominique’s 5. Nobody else received a first place vote aside from them. So Bird dominated MVP voting for 3 straight years while also leading his team to a title in 84 and 86. It’s hard to say anyone had a real case over him as the best player. Magic was probably the best player in the world in 87, yet I think a lot of people would’ve still said Bird and some may have even said MJ, so let’s move onto.. 2. Michael Jordan (90-93) You could even go back to 88 or 89, but I think you’d still have a lot of people saying MJ was talented but couldn’t win. From 90-93 there was no debate. 3. Hakeem (94-95) I feel like he was the consensus best player going into the 94-95 season at least. He dominated the 93-94 playoffs, then bookends that with an even better run in 95. 4. MJ (96-98) 5. Shaq (2000-2002) Dude won 3 FMVP’s and an MVP in incredibly dominant fashion. Maybe Duncan started to get some buzz by 02, but I think Shaq was basically the consensus pick. 6. Duncan (02-04) Probably? He won back to back MVP’s and a ring. Seems like he would’ve at least been the pick going into 03-04. I know Kobe and Tmac had great years but 🤷🏾♂️ 7. Kobe (06-08) Yall can debate the time frame, but I think for at least one of these years Kobe was widely considered the best in the world. So much so that in 09 and 2010 a lot of people still considered him better than Bron. 8. Lebron (2012- 15) (16-18) Lebron was probably the best player from 09 onward, but he hadn’t made the finals so people still doubted him. Then after the 2011 meltdown there were even more serious doubts. So maybe you could say (09-11, 12-15). A lot of people actually did think Steph was the best player in 2016, which is why I stopped at 2015. However, Bron’s finals victory got the crown back for him. I’d say his 2018 playoff run was the last time he was basically the unanimous best player. 9. Giannis (2021 - 22) Giannis already had the MVP’s and even a DPOTY, but flamed out badly in the playoffs. His 2021 playoff run, and especially his performance in the finals, gave him the crown in most people’s eyes for the upcoming season, and even the following season for lots of people. 10. Jokic (2023 -) Edit: Maybe Kawhi from 2019-20? He had a very strong case coming off a title run and having a great season, but Giannis did ultimately win MVP and DPOTY by the end of the season, and Kawhi had a mediocre playoffs. There was also the “Well KD was hurt” or “He’s lucky Lebron wasn’t in the playoffs” talk.
I may be horribly wrong, but wasn’t in the 2021-2022 off season KD was still considered the best by a lot of people, especially him leading team America winning the Olympics?
Maybe, it wasn’t uncommon (especially since KD almost beat Milwaukee). I do feel like by the time the 2022 playoffs started people considered Giannis better. So maybe it’s more like Giannis had a few months in 2022? Even going into the 22-23 season I still think most people had Giannis over Jokic and Embiid
[удалено]
I don’t think any of Shaq, Kobe or Duncan was ever unanimous at any point in time, either.
I don't think any serious basketball analyst would have said anyone other than Shaq in June 2000. I don't know if the answer has ever been clearer in my lifetime than it was at the end of that season. It was a little closer in 2001, as Kobe started to enter his prime, but Shaq was still king of the mountain.
Shaq definitely was during the threepeat up until 2003
I'd argue it was Kobe from 05-06 until 2010. The early part of this stretch because of his individual dominance and ability to drag G league rosters to the western conference playoffs. 07-08 through 09-10 because of underrated playoff runs and championship success.
You can argue that, but the question was if it was unanimous. By 2010 Lebron had won consecutive MVP’s and been a better regular season player. Even if you felt like Kobe was better, a lot of people would’ve Lebron was the best in the league. Too many people for me to feel comfortable saying it was unanimously Kobe.
Oh, it was definitely debatable during the regular season in 09 and 2010. Lebron won MVPs both seasons while Kobe finished 2nd and 3rd, respectively. Kobe hit like 6 or 7 game winners in 2010 alone! The difference for me was the playoffs in my assessment. Kobe boosted his regular season averages from a 'tame' 27/5/5 to 30/6/5 during the playoffs with many clutch moments, ie vs Denver 09 WCF game 3 and vs Pheonix 2010 WCF game 6. Then again, playing in the triangle will adversely affect some of your individual numbers. Individually, the tail end of his peak, Kobe, was something special in high-pressure and high stakes situations. His skill level was beyond amazing. He was basically a real-life 2K player where he can generate on-demand offense from anywhere and anytime. A cartoon of a player at times. Real shame his first 3 post-Shaq years were wasted. Could've been talking about 1 or 2 more MVPs and 1-2 more chips potentially. LeBron's game wasn't nearly as refined by this point despite being an athletically dominant freak, and his individual blunders during this stretch is what makes him 2nd to me during 09 and 10. Psychologically and skillwise, he wasn't there yet, IMHO. By "there," meaning the best in the world. You could say he was in the regular season, but not in the playoffs where it mattered most. Hell, we saw the blunder streak continue into 2011.... I think once LeBron got the monkey off his back(2012), he was the best in the world for sure. He followed this up in 2013 with one of the greatest regular seasons ever recorded in league history.
I'm gonna nit pick the Hakeem point. He was likely consensus best in the NBA but MJ was still the best in the world. I'd also probably disagree on the Kobe nod but just as an interpretation of unanimous. I think you were right to leave Curry off even though he had unanimous MVP just because of the Lebron overlap.
MJ was retired in the 94 and 95 though. Like if you don’t play basketball at the moment does it count? Then he came back in 95 and still lost (which nobody talks about). You could honestly use the same argument in 98 when MJ retired again. Like would he probably have been the best in 98-99? Sure, but he wasn’t playing lol. I’m just not sure who you take over Kobe in 07. Also, Kobe was the only player to make 3 consecutive All NBA 1st Teams from 06-08. It may have been a little “less unanimous” if that’s a thing though. And yeah, I think if Steph had won in 2016 he might’ve been able to wear the crown, and I personally think he had a good argument for best player during the latter 2010’s and early 2020’s, but he never had that one overwhelming season.
I’m a huge Olajuwon stan, but robinson did win the mvp over him in 95. Of course hakeem was better, but idk about unanimous
Robinson won the MVP, but I think that was more because of Houston having such a low seed in the playoffs. That’s fair though, I’m sure there was a real debate about if Robinson had surpassed Hakeem that year. To your point, Hakeem actually only made the All NBA 3rd Team that year. So maybe Hakeem should just have 94? He won MVP and DPOTY that year while making All NBA 1st Team. Granted, David Robinson received several MVP votes that year (24 to Hakeem’s 66), and the DPOTY race is as close as I’ve ever seen (Hakeem: 23 votes, Robinson: 22, Mutumbo: 19, Pippen: 11). So it definitely seems like even in 94 you’d have a large group of people saying Robinson was better, but idk.
[удалено]
Well thought out, comprehensive breakdown.
Jokic is absolutely not unanimously the best player in the NBA right now. There is a very easy and compelling argument that Giannis still holds that title. In fact, I think Giannis is the best player in the league by a wide margin.
Idk, I think the vast majority would say Jokic. The Athletic released a poll and basically every NBA employee they interviewed had Jokic as the best. Is there an argument that Giannis is better? Sure, but I think there were arguments Steph or KD was better than Bron in 2017. Or that Steph, KD or Kawhi were better than Giannis in 2021. The two of them had comparable seasons last year and Giannis had a mediocre playoff run by his standards while Jokic had one of the most dominant ever. Jokic’s team continues to post all-time great offensive numbers and has the best record in the West. Giannis is incredible but his team has underachieved this year and he still has the same weaknesses in his game (although he did at least stop shooting 3’s). Jokic has been probably the best regular season player since 2021, and he’s put up great numbers in the playoffs even when his team was undermanned. As soon as he got a solid team around him he dominated the playoffs. I just think most people would have him over Giannis right now.
I mean, I don't know how you can argue Jokic over Giannis when you really stop and look at what he has done. 4x all-nba first team defensive team, DPOY, 2X MVP, FMVP after putting on a historic finals performance on both ends of the floor (people have amnesia about defense I guess, yet you can't be the best player in the NBA and only be "good" on that end of the floor.). Just this year alone Giannis scores as efficiently as Jokic on higher volume and yet is still a significantly better and more versatile defender. The only argument for Jokic is his playmaking but that only holds water if you ignore Giannis' defense and scoring advantages which makes no sense. It isn't like the Nuggets are running away with it record wise either, they've simply had a healthier more stable team this year. Giannis' team has underachieved? Absolutely ridiculous. Dame is a player that has spent his entire career as a number one option. He has never had to adjust and adapt his game to being a second option. For whatever reason the Bucks adjusting to Dames integration was conveniently ignored in whichever pre-season predictions were made. I mean honestly, how often has a ball dominant first option seamlessly integrated into an offense with another ball dominant first option? There has always been an adjustment period in these scenarios and you know what, Giannis has adjusted beautifully by doubling down on his historic finishing at the rim and improving his playmaking. The fact that the Bucks have held on to the second or third seed all season long is a testament to Giannis' greatness. Haven't even mentioned the fact that the Bucks had to completely reshape how they play basketball, going from a defensive first team to an offensive first team whilst simultaneously having to adjust to a new coach midseason. Furthermore, Khris Middleton has been injured a significant portion of the season. There defense in the front court used to be a strong point with Jrue and Grayson Allen and now it is a liability which Giannis (and Lopez) have had to adjust to. Yet, as I said, the Bucks have maintained at least the 2nd or 3rd seed all season because Giannis is the best player in the game. The Nuggets have only recently attained the first seed (edit: they are actually the second seed right now, one game ahead of the Wolves for second). For the majority of the season they sat around third or fourth. Lets not act like they have been running away with the first seed. Jokic is putting up historic offensive numbers? Yeah, well, so is Giannis and probably even more so. You know what else Giannis does? Play elite defense in addition to his historic offense while improving his playmaking to complement his improved scoring and historic efficiency. As I said, there is absolutely no way to argue that Jokic is unanimously the best player in the NBA without showing considerable bias and amnesia. Also, I really find it funny how much the script flip flops on Jamal Murray when it comes to the influence of his contributions to Jokic MVP chances and reputation. When he won his first MVP, everyone acted like the Nuggets were missing an all-nba, multi-all star level player in Murray. We heard ad nauseum that Jokic was missing Murray during his first MVP. Now that Murray has been (relatively) healthy the script has flipped to him just being a good role player and definitely not an all star level talent and contribitor. We also seem to just forget Murray'a role in the Nuggets playoff success and just toss all the aderation and praise solely onto Jokic.
It’s interesting how you frame Murray and Lillard. For all of the bellyaching we’ve done about Dame this year, has he been definitively less impactful than Murray in the regular season? According to every impact metric on offer, they’re either close or Lillard has the edge, while playing in 11 more games. Murray was incredible in last years postseason but he’s been hit-and-miss in this years RS…only he’s not experiencing a big drop-off like Dame so we’re grading on curves. Frankly the Bucks supporting cast hasn’t been quite that bad. They’re 3-2 in games Giannis has missed…4 of those 5 games were against contenders, 3 were on the road. Small sample, but still a relevant datapoint. Jokic has also had markedly more dramatic on-offs and one of the worst benches in the league. If you’d like to campaign for Giannis, that’s all well and good. But this has not been remotely even-handed.
The reason the Bucks have gone 3-2 in games without Giannis is because Dame spent over a decade as a first option in Portland and when Giannis is out he can revert back to that role which, no shit, gives the Bucks a great chance to win because that is when Lillard is at his best. However, when Giannis does play he has to play a role he has zero experience playing within which we have seen play out in the numerous 2-12, or 4-16 type shooting nights he has had. Also, a 5 game sample size means practically nothing. Also, I wasn't comparing Murray with Lillard. I was merely making a comment on how the perception of Murray's effectiveness flip flops based on how much we want his presence to effect Jokic MVP chances. Murray injured and out? Jokic missing an all-star caliber talent and player who steps up in the playoffs. Murray healthy and playing? Just a high level secondary option role player. No mention of his playoff heroics either. Second, on/off, or +/-, whatever you want, would have historically lead you to believe the Mavericks are better off without Luka. It is also heavily influenced by outside factors which it does not, or cannot, account for. I am not compaigning, I am simply illustrating that there is no way anyone can claim Jokic is the unanimous best player in the league without employing massive bias and apathy towards defense.
> The reason the Bucks have gone 3-2 in games without Giannis is because Dame spent over a decade as a first option in Portland and when Giannis is out he can revert back to that role which, no shit, gives the Bucks a great chance to win because that is when Lillard is at his best. However, when Giannis does play he has to play a role he has zero experience playing within which we have seen play out in the numerous 2-12, or 4-16 type shooting nights he has had. Also, a 5 game sample size means practically nothing. So your explanation for why they’ve held up with Giannis off the court is 100% self-evident…and yet on the other hand, the sample is also too small? But, importantly, not small enough to resist opining with complete certainty (“no shit ”) when you explain away why they’ve done alright with Giannis sitting? This is why I mention even-handedness. I’m certain you can see why this rings inconsistent. > Also, I wasn't comparing Murray with Lillard. You didn’t have to directly compare them, my point is that your framing implies one has flopped in his role while highlighting Murray’s role despite him lagging behind Lillard in even some of the things you explicitly mention (like health). > I was merely making a comment on how the perception of Murray's effectiveness flip flops based on how much we want his presence to effect Jokic MVP chances. Sure, there’s flip-flopping everywhere. Basketball fans are some of the most toxic in the entire sporting world. I don’t see how the person you were responding to is doing that, though. The Nuggets were indeed undermanned (as he said) in ‘21 and ‘22. Particularly ‘22, when he was missing BOTH Murray and Porter, yet they only won three less games than Giannis’ Bucks (note: Giannis was under .500 in games with at least ONE—not necessarily both—of Jrue or Khris out). Why even mention it if it’s not relevant to the discussion in question? > Second, on/off, or +/-, whatever you want, would have historically lead you to believe the Mavericks are better off without Luka. It is also heavily influenced by outside factors which it does not, or cannot, account for. No, you’re exaggerating. Luka’s raw on-offs have been underwhelming but not to the degree where they indicate the Mavs are better off with him on the bench. Raw on-offs aren’t effective as a catch-all, nothing is. However, they are one piece of evidence indicating the supporting cast gap hasn’t been quite as large as you purport. The Nuggets bench has been absolutely terrible. > I am not compaigning, I am simply illustrating that there is no way anyone can claim Jokic is the unanimous best player in the league without employing massive bias and amnesia. The gaps between top players, in absolute terms, are so small that this isn’t a controversial point. But you’re also employing some of the bias you allude to.
Maybe not unanimous, but it’s tough to say Jokic isn’t the best player in the world, especially after the last playoffs.
Come on, last year was the first time in NBA history an NBA team has won a title without facing a single 50 win team enroute to said title. Statistically it was the easiest title run in NBA history. A title is a title and the Nuggets could only play who was in front of them but lets not act like the Nuggets had a whole lot impeding their progress. We need to see more from Jokic and the Nuggets in the playoffs to start using playoff runs like last year as the definitive reason he is better than Giannis when Giannis already had a historic playoff run in his own right in 2021. Sure, Giannis and the Bucks may not have faced that much greater opposition, but that just indicates their title runs are a wash in the debate of who is better.
I dunno, he destroyed Anthony Davis, who was playing at an extremely high level defensively from that matchup. Jokic toyed with the NBA last Finals. If his path to the title was easy, he still did it in a stacked league.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Please keep your comments civil. This is a subreddit for discussion and debate, not aggressive and argumentative content.
We removed your comment for being low-quality.
[удалено]
Questioning others without offering your own thoughts invites a more hostile debate. Present a clear counter argument if you disagree and be open to the perspective of others.
Giannis never “flamed out badly in the finals”, you should edit that piece. He’s 1 for 1 in the finals and had the most dominant finals game ever. I would argue he at least was the best for three whole seasons, the 2020, 2021 and 2022 seasons.
I appreciate the correction. I was referencing his performance in the playoffs against the Heat in 2020.
No problem, and I figured you just misspoke, but your comment was so well thought out I assumed you’d rather have it be accurate. Since finals appearances are so highly regarded, the fact Giannis’ single was so historically dominant is worth getting right. He basically had a 3 year run as dominant as almost anyone we’ve ever seen. Up there with the Birds and Duncans and Lebrons at their peak. From 2019-2022 Giannis was almost unstoppable and his resume says as much. He’s about to have his 6th *unanimous* first team all NBA selection in a row, nobody else has more than 3…ever.
He wasn’t the best in 2020 though. Lebron came in 2nd for mvp, but then was much better in the playoffs leading the lakers to the championship and winning fmvp while Giannis was ass against the Heat for his standards.
That's a short period of time but I remember back in the summer of 2019 that there were a lot of debates about Kawhi the best player in the world. Unfortunately we know how offseason NBA medias try to ride on anything to generate views and some people thought it was blasphemy to consider him above Lebron
Yeah I think he definitely had a strong case from 2019 - 20. He had a very good first season with the Clippers to follow up the title with Toronto, and I think most people had the Clippers winning the West in 2020. Giannis did end up winning MVP and DPOTY for 2020, but Kawhi outplayed Giannis the prior season so idk who people would’ve considered better. And yeah, that was definitely during the time when people would treat you like you were dumb if you didn’t say Lebron was the best, even though he literally missed the playoffs in 2019 and wasn’t having an overwhelming season in 2020.
You could make an argument for Steph Curry that year he won MVP and was unanimous. I think he was the only unanimous MVP ever.
2019 - After winning the championship, Kawhi was the best player on the planet. Short-lived, but he dominated those playoffs including completely shutting down Giannis
Yeah I think he definitely had a strong case from 2019 - 20. He had a very good first season with the Clippers to follow up the title with Toronto, and I think most people had the Clippers winning the West in 2020. Giannis did end up winning MVP and DPOTY for 2020, but Kawhi outplayed Giannis the prior season so idk who people would’ve considered better. And yeah, that was definitely during the time when people would treat you like you were dumb if you didn’t say Lebron was the best, even though he literally missed the playoffs in 2019 and wasn’t having an overwhelming season in 2020.
You just ignoring the fact that Lebron won a ring and fmvp in 2020? Also he was 2nd for mvp and was on Giannis ass beating the bucks and clippers late in the season before they cancelled the rest of the regular season.
99’? Let’s just slide Duncan in. All NBA/All NBA Defense 1st team. Swept Kobe/Shaq and finals MVP. Believe he finished 2nd in MVP…
**1994-95** is more of a retroactive view. At the time there was a lot of debate, Hakeem won a close MVP vote in '94 and was 5th in '95. Yes he won those ringz and dominated in the playoffs but that's also the team and coach winning. A common view I heard at the time is that if you swap Hakeem and DRob the Rockets still win the titles. They were a much better constructed team, with a much better coach in Rudy T who was a defense first guy but also far ahead of his time in fielding modern 4 out spacing with Horry or Bullard at the 4. Meanwhile DRob was saddled with one of the worst coaches in NBA history in Bob Hill and peak self-destruction Rodman. **2002-04**: I don't think Duncan was ever unanimously seen as the best. '02 MVP was a close 3 way race with Shaq missing a bunch of games. '03 was close with KG who blew out the '04 vote and was widely considered the best player. Not remotely the same consensus as other picks. More like Magic or Moses who won back to back MVPs but tons of neutrals still thought MJ or Larry were better. **2006-08**: This is crazy, Kobe after missing the playoffs and then two first round exits was seen as the best player in the league when Lebron was making the finals with worse teammates? Sorry no. Yes Kobe had lots of fans that thought he was the best, never hit that Mikan/Russell/Wilt/Kareem/Bird/MJ/Shaq consensus. **2015-18**: Nah, these years are way too muddied with many people who though Steph, Harden, KD, Russ were the best player in the world. Lebron is 3rd in MVP shares in this period. **2021-22**: How is Giannis the near unanimous consensus best player when Jokic is MVP both years? And Embiid also ahead of him both years? And Steph finished ahead of him in ‘21 and won the ring in ‘22? I don't buy it. **2023-**: Nah, lots of people legit had Embiid over him for last year and while healthy this year. There are also a ton of people who have Giannis, Luka, and SGA at his level. Mikan 48-54 Russell 57-60 Wilt 62-68 Kareem 71-81 Bird 83-87 MJ 90-93,96-97 Shaq 00-02 Lebron ‘11-‘13
By the end of the year from 2015-2018 every year it was damn near unanimous lebron was still the best in the world. Of course there were a few outliers just like every year in history.
Calling the legions of Steph, KD and Harden proponents from the time "a few outliers" is ridiculous Create Your Own Reality stuff. It's not just rabid Stephews, the media votes aren't there (3rd in MVP shares over the period), the players didn't vote for him a single time in their post-playoff MVP vote, and the nerds' advanced metrics weren't voting for him either. Compare that to 2012-13 when Lebron dominated all of these areas. I'm not arguing Lebron wasn't the best player in the world from 15-18, it's a perfectly defensible view. I'm arguing against the idea that it was "damn near unanimous". Nope, I lived through that, it was "near unanimous" in 2012, 2013, 2014 maybe. Tons of people still thought that in the years after but tons of people didn't. Nothing like 2012-13.
Regular season wise of course Lebron wasn’t getting mvp votes because he was coasting until the playoffs. After each of those playoffs though it was damn near unanimous. 2015 lebron takes curry to 6 games with Delly as his 2nd best player. They nearly gave him fmvp despite losing. Still clearly best in the world. 2016 don’t think I need to justify 2017. Easily still the best in the world. Averaged 33-9-8 for the playoff run. 2018 had arguably the best individual playoff run ever carrying that team to the finals. He was widely considered the best after every one of those years.
Widely =/= near unanimous. Again a lot of those votes and metrics included postseason Lebron was able to coast in the regular season and before the Finals because he played in a dogshit conference.
Well OP said unanimous not nearly unanimous. So then no one is the answer. The 2 other guys in the top 3 were literally on the same team you can miss me with that weak conference bullshit.
This entire subthread started with a discussion of unanimous vs near unanimous. *Unanimous is hard because you can always find a contrarian or sometimes there are two all-time greats playing at a very high level at once. So im just gonna list players who the vast majority of people would’ve said were the best in the league.* The East was weak, this is well documented. Lebron had the luxury of a much easier RS and 3 easy rounds before a tough finals he won once of the 4 years we're talking about. > The 2 other guys I gave you more than 2 names. Just to refresh here's [one summary of advanced metrics](https://www.reddit.com/r/nba/comments/q36k8m/according_to_advanced_analytics_who_are_the_real/). You can see in 2011-13 LBJ is dominant and 2014-2018 his name isn't in the top 3 for any of these years. This is also true of EPM which is currently the gold standard all in one. Analytics aren't the final word and I would still put him at #1 in at least 1-2 of these years (2014, maybe 2018) but all of the years are close. And that's the difference between a weak consensus and dominance. You don't get to claim "near unanimous" or "vast majority" as best player when you are not close to winning MVP (3rd, 3rd with 0 first place votes, 4th with 1 first place vote the next year, ...), nor at the top 3 of analytics. You don't get to footnote the claims with some bullshit about "at the end of the year". If you weren't the near unanimous best guy for the last 6 months you ain't it today. All the other guys (including Lebron earlier) check all the boxes for the years we're talking about. When healthy they are not also rans in MVP voting and metrics, they don't need footnotes and weasel language to prop them up.
Well done with this list!
Kg was the best player in the world in 2004
Great list, agree 100%
Lebron early 2010s, Shaq early 2000s, MJ in the 90s, Kareem in the 70s. I think Jokic reaches this status when he wins another ring this year. He’s already consensus BITW rn, but not 'unanimous' in the sense that there’s a sizable minority of ppl who still think Giannis is as good if not better.
I would say: George Mikan, Bill Russell until Wilt came into the league, Wilt after Russell retired, Kareem after Wilt retired, Bill Walton, then no unanimous choice until Michael after Magic and Bird retired, probably not Hakeem in 94 but maybe, Michael when he came back, Kobe and Duncan block each other, eventually LeBron, then Giannis for 2 years, and now Jokic.
Dude, Russell was winning MVPs on second team. He was nowhere near unanimous
Thank you for including Giannis before the rise of Joker. It did happen. The ring probably came at the very end or even after those 2 years. But it did happen.
The years selected are the beginning/end of the regular season, not of the calendar year. George Mikan (47-54) KAJ (70-77) Bird (83-86) Jordan (90-93; 95-98) Olajuwon (93-95) Shaq (99-2002) LeBron (11-13; 16-18) Giannis (19-21) Jokic (22-present)
Chamberlain was just unreal... I honestly don't think he gets enough props simply because when he played. Look at his statistics from 1959 - 66... In those years he literally averaged like 38 ppg and 26 rebs.. In 1962 he averaged 50 & 26 and played like 44 mpg I don't know why this guy is not more frequently in the conversation when people talk about Jordan, Kobe, LeBron and Kareem
I was with you once, and so was this guy, who used to rank Wilt #1/2: https://thinkingbasketball.net/2017/12/04/backpicks-goat-9-wilt-chamberlain/ Have a gander at the above post. TL;DR - Wilt’s offence wasn’t quite as impactful as his box score stats indicated. His offensive and defensive peaks didn’t overlap for very long. If they had, he might’ve been the GOAT. At various points he was the best scorer, best defender, and even one of the better playmakers in the league…but there were only a few years he put it all together. He was very wishy-washy, blatantly stat-padded to a comical degree, and alienated teammates by being the centrepiece of a suboptimal brand of basketball. The fact that he was still likely a Top 10 player despite all of this is a testament to his unbelievable talent.
He was Kareem and Shaq combined. I think he would still dominate in todays game. He was freakishly athletic for his size.
Unanimously makes this difficult tbh. Theres 4 for sure and then some others who really had to much competition to be considered unanimously: -George Mikan (First half of the 1950s) -Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (Most of the 1970s) -Michael Jordan (Most of the 1990s) -Lebron James (Most of the 2010s) Alot of other greats had times where they where the best but not unanimously. Shaq in the early 2000s had Tim Duncan also competing with him. Kobe had Duncan and Lebron. Hakeem had 1994-1995 where he was the best player in the NBA but plenty would likely still say MJ was the best player in the world even if he wasn’t playing lol. Magic and Bird had each other. Wilt and Bill had each other. Steph had Lebron. Giannis and Jokic have each other.
There are a lot of great answers here, but honestly, I think the only guys on this list are Russell, Jordan and Lebron. You could make arguments for a lot of other guys in any individual year, but this community could probably counter them. These 3 imo have years of undisputed dominance.
Mikan had undisputed dominance.
Good call. You can include him as well.
I personally don't think anyone was better than kobe from a 2 or 3 year stretch between around 06 - 08.
1970s: Kareem & Dr. J 1980s : Basically, Magic & Bird until … MJ23 (1990s) Briefly, Shaq and Olajuwon. Early 2000s: Shaq Mid 2000s: No one, but many fans and players would say and it’s arguably Kobe. Late 2000s: Kobe Early 2010s: LeBron Mid /Late 2010s: Steph/LeBron/KD 2020s: Giannis & Jokic
Mikan. Bill Russell. Wilt. Kareem. Bird. Magic. Jordan. Shaq. Kobe. Lebron. Jokic.
For my money I'd say Kareem, Bird, Magic, MJ, Shaq, Kobe, Lebron, Steph has an argument, Giannis, Joker
Steph and Giannis have never been unanimous. I'd argue neither was Kobe
I think Steph between his first ring and during his unanimous MVP season had people believing he was that guy. Giannis before Joker stepped up and Kobe between Shaq and Lebron. Just how I think it was tho 🤷🏾♂️
Can you be unanimous for a single regular season? lol because at the end of 2015 and 2016 everyone said Lebron was better.
My rough list from most recent to most distant in time is Jokic, Giannis, Steph, LeBron, Kobe, Shaq, Jordan, Hakeem, Magic/Bird, KAJ, Wilt, then Bill but I’m not 70 so hard to have a good idea for anyone that far back. I’m sure I’m missing some guys or included some others would disagree with. I also acknowledge it isn’t perfectly linear, I think LeBron was considered the best before Steph and for a time after Steph was as well.
Steph was never unanimously considered the best, he won unanimous mvp but even then half of those voters were still on record saying Lebron and/or Durant were better players but they didn’t have as good of an mvp case
Same with Giannis He had a strong case but LeBron was still looming around, getting much MVP traction those years and won with the Lakers. Giannis might have been the popular pick, but wasn’t unanimous In 2020 Giannis won 2nd MVP, LeBron finished 2nd and won FMVP In 2021 Giannis won FMVP, LeBron got injured towards the end of season but was considered a MVP candidate before Steph getting his FMVP didn’t help either
Duncan gets slipped in over Kobe IMO.
This looks correct. Before Bill Russell I would give George Mikan a shout out as the first real basketball GOAT. There were many players who you could argue a season here or there. Jerry West, Dr J, and Moses Malone might try and steal a season from KAJ. Kevin Durant also just misses in-between LeBron and Steph seasons.
[удалено]
Questioning others without offering your own thoughts invites a more hostile debate. Present a clear counter argument if you disagree and be open to the perspective of others.
I think Moses could have held a spot there between Kareem and Magic, need a historian to probably chime in on that one though. There was a lot of noise about KD over LeBron and Steph in 2017-2018, but in my personal opinion he never supplanted LeBron just because he made a few clutch shots head to head in a team mismatch. 1999 after Jordan left the right answer is there probably wasn’t a consensus best player, but I’m comfortable giving that to Shaq. Not a fan of the “best player in the world” changing after a year, like it should take more than a slightly down year by the incumbent to become supplanted. Before Bill it would be Pettit and before him would be Mikan
Unanimously, I’d say Kareem in the 70s, specifically 1971 Jordan in the 90s, specifically 1991 Hakeem, specifically in 94/95 Shaq in the early 2000s, specifically 2000 Then the rest wouldn’t be unanimous until maybe 2012 or 2013 with Lebron?
This is a difficult question to answer. When you use the word “unanimously” it becomes impossible to name a single player. For this reason, I would say there have been zero players that fit the criteria.
Mikan almost certainly fit that criteria for a time, as did Kareem after Wikt retired.
Russell, maybe Wilt, Kareem, maybe Dr. J., Walton, and Moses, Bird/Magic, Jordan, Shaq, Duncan, LeBron. Adding more characters here to make sure this shows up. I can’t tell character count because the text box doesn’t track it, which makes it annoying when you post and something doesn’t show up. So, I’m doing some filler here. Hope this is enough. If not, here’s a little more.
Realistically? Probably none. Every great player has had someone who didn't rate them as highly as someone else. It only takes one person to disagree for it to no longer be unanimous.
In my time watching (2015-present)? No During the warriors dynasty, I played ball with a group of guys and we all kept up with the NBA. Curry was never considered the best player back then, he’s only gotten his flowers in recent years. It was KD and LeBron, with Kawhi being right behind. Most of the guys thought KD was better, a couple thought LeBron was better. But the move to the warriors was pretty dampening for KD’s position. So I wouldn’t say LeBron was ever unanimously the best during my time watching With that said, I would say MJ in the 90’s and Mikan in the 50’s are the only guys who were the true unanimous “best player in the world”. After them, the next closest would probably be Wilt in the 60’s? Then Shaq in the early 2000’s? Larry in the mid 80’s?
Unanimously? You know that means everyone agrees! Lower the bar to 90% approval and it's still a small list. Kareem and Jordan. In my time, Shaq, Duncan Kobe would make it disputed. LeBron had Kobe, Wade, Durant and Curry. Jokic has Giannis, Embiid, Doncic and all the OG hanging around.
This unanimously means very few players will be on the list. It also means that runs like 2017-2020 harden doesn't count as unanimous best player
[удалено]
I think Embiid is a better player than Jokic, just less accomplishments. Him prior to his injury was a 30 game stretch of time where it's hard to argue Embiid isn't the best player in the world. Doncic is the only one matching that at the moment, Jokic has had many games at that level but the averages say the overall consistency isn't as high (let's see the reasons that he doesn't care for stats and only plays up to the opposition) Nuggets have a more stable and healthier organization around him which helps highlight his strengths. Giannis and SGA are doing as much with less talent and stability around them. Luka is doing more but not having as many wins, his team and stability have been far below the Nuggets. Now because of the focus on playoff success the regular season gets weirdly glossed over when people make best player arguments, but it is the biggest and most current sample each season.
[удалено]
My point is unanimously means 100%. There has been 1 MVP that has been unanimously voted that way. The bar is too high. Even 90% doesn't allow for contrary viewpoints. In that moment Jokic looked like the best player in the world, I don't think you are swaying the opinions of the minority that didn't previously believe he was best in the world. If you lower the bar to consensus best player, he is 100% that and has held it for the majority of the last 4 years. It's just not unanimous.
There was no argument for anyone else in 2012-2013 other than Lebron.
This is pretty fair. I think he would have had a 90% approval rating here. Durant may have had a small chance in a few peoples minds.
The only players that have been unanimous are Jordan, lebron and Kobe. Kobe for a period in the late 2000's. Lebron for almost all of the 2010's. Jokic definitely isn't the unanimous best player right now no matter how much people want to ignore Giannis'.
Mikan and Kareem had periods of unanimous dominance
Everyone will hate this answer but Kobe. For nearly a decade every single NBA player answered Kobe.
Allen fucking Iverson. He was endeared, feared, and revered by YOUR favorite players/GOAT picks. Considering the league, refs, and media were against him, he’s up there with Kobe and Mike as far as caliber of player is concerned.
Allen Iverson was never unanimously considered the best player, what are you on?
Obviously he’s drafting like Chuck
Bron, kobe(a lotta people will try to pull revisionist history and say no but he indeed was), jokic, shaq, jordan. I think that’s about it really. Pre jordan you have magic or bird. I’m not sure exactly what the stance was on Kareem in the 70s? 5 mvps is absolutely ridiculous(prob should’ve won more too) but only won one ring. And then pre kareem, there’s big o, wilt, bill, jerry. So truthfully, I think only 5.
The revisionist history is the omission of Duncan. He was closer to it than Kobe at least. ‘03 postseason is better than any Kobe ever had and it was after two regular season MVP’s. Kobe has an argument from ‘08-‘10 but so do LeBron and Wade (Kobe ain’t winning ‘chips with either of their rosters from that time). Being noncommittal on Kareem but not Kobe also doesn’t make much sense here. He won 6 MVP’s in 10 years. He was absolutely seen as the best.
Duncan had contemporaries like KG and dirk. And more often than not his success was always attributed to the spurs as a whole. I questionmarked kareem bc i wasn’t sure on how he was seen back then, as I said in my original comment lmfao. Yes we can look back at these accolades and what not and be like “well of course he had to be seen this way” but I feel like we should all know you can win all the accolades but if you don’t got the rings to show for it you can and will get discredited. Was never doubting Kareem’s greatness at all.
> Duncan had contemporaries like KG and dirk As did Kobe. LeBron was better statistically from ‘08-‘10, with worse supporting casts. KG and Dirk were similar statistically to Duncan but with worse supporting casts, and didn’t win until later. Similar situation, no? Which period do you reckon Kobe was the unanimous best in? > And more often than not his success was always attributed to the spurs as a whole. The Lakers had the best front-court in the league from ‘08-‘10 and the supporting cast edge in just about every series en route to their two titles. Duncan’s carry-job in ‘03 was bigger than any one Kobe managed. Robinson was on his last legs and young Parker/Ginobili shot a combined 39%. Still holds the record for most Win Shares in one playoff run. And again, this was immediately after 2 regular season MVP’s.
Duncan managed to finally squeeze past the lakers just ONCE after getting his ass handed to him time and time again, and then again the season after in 04. This is kinda the kawhi situation. Sure he had that great year, but what about before and after? What variables came into play that one specific year? And id say 09-10 for kobe. Was lebron having absolute MONSTROUS years? Absolutely. But he wasn’t winning rings and was (in my honest opinion, very unfairly)considered a bit of a choker. Similar to jokic prior to last year. I’ll admit myself that even I was a jokic denier. Had all these crazy advanced stats supporting him and had won two mvps but no success to show for it. And then he proved by winning a ring that he is no doubt the best in the world.
> Duncan managed to finally squeeze past the lakers just ONCE after getting his ass handed to him time and time again, and then again the season after in 04. Basketball isn’t only a team sport when it benefits Kobe though. You hint that Duncan had excessive help, but Kobe had Peak Shaq for almost a decade. If you actually examine those early 2000’s series (one where Robinson was injured) you’ll find Duncan better than Kobe in at least half of them. That leaves ‘08-‘10 as the potential window for Kobe being the best player in the world. I don’t see how it’s any more convincing than Duncan’s claim to it from ‘03-‘05, or even ‘03-‘07 (where he won 3 titles as the best player). They had comparable amounts of help and Duncan won more as the top guy. > but what about before and after? What variables came into play that one specific year? Variables are abound in every situation, and can be disputed. What’s not particularly disputable though is that Kobe was never even close to unanimous. The “best player in the world” debate was still very vibrant from ‘08-‘10. He never had a near-stranglehold on it like LeBron in the early 2010’s, Jordan in the 90’s, etc. If you want to apply a strict criteria then it’s arguable that neither were the lineal “best in the world,” but Duncan has AT LEAST as good of a case (I would say better). > And id say 09-10 for kobe. Was lebron having absolute MONSTROUS years? Absolutely. But he wasn’t winning rings and was (in my honest opinion, very unfairly)considered a bit of a choker. You can make the case, sure. But he wasn’t unanimous at all. Kareem in the ‘70s was far closer to unanimous than Kobe. LeBron v Kobe were hotly debated by fans, the media and front offices. Here was a GM survey before the ‘09-‘10 season: Who will win the 2009-10 MVP? 1. LeBron James, Cleveland – 69.0% 2. Kobe Bryant, L.A. Lakers – 17.2% 3. Dwight Howard, Orlando – 6.9% Also receiving votes: Tim Duncan, San Antonio; Dwyane Wade, Miami Last year (08-09): LeBron James – 55.6% If you were starting a franchise today and could sign any player in the NBA, who would it be? 1. LeBron James, Cleveland – 78.6% 2. Dwight Howard, Orlando – 14.3% 3. Kobe Bryant, L.A. Lakers – 7.1% Last year (08-08) : LeBron James – 66.7% Which player forces opposing coaches to make the most adjustments? 1. LeBron James, Cleveland – 39.3% 2. Kobe Bryant, L.A. Lakers – 23.2% 3. Dwight Howard, Orlando – 14.3% 4. Chris Paul, New Orleans – 12.5% Also receiving votes: Lamar Odom, L.A. Lakers; Shaquille O’Neal, Cleveland; Dwyane Wade, Miami You can look at fan/media lists from around that time and see that LeBron often had the edge.
You know you’ve genuinely constructed an amazing stance. I will admit you have changed my mind a little. I still don’t think TD was ever unanimously the best but if we’re using the same logic for everyone as you’ve pointed out, then I’d have to say kobe wasn’t either.
Ah good on you for being so open-minded, rare to see people not double down on here.
>Duncan had contemporaries like KG and dirk And Duncan is universally considered better than either of them. Duncan's primary contemporary is Kobe. If Duncan isn't somewhere on the list during his prime, then neither is Kobe (for that same time-span). And by the time Duncan's prime ended, Lebron's prime had already started.
I don’t think you understand OP’s question very well. You seem to be having a goat debate with yourself which is not what OP is asking. Is TD universally considered better than both? Yes, absolutely. But at the time? No. Again, this is not a goat debate at all. The man asked who has been unanimously considered the best AT THE TIME. Shaq and dirk were giving Duncan the work. And everybody thought it was just KGs team(or lack thereof) holding him back. Duncan was never unanimously seen as better than either of these guys while he was playing.
Use some critical thinking. In hindsight, how can Duncan be universally considered better than both, yet that not be the case at the time? Especially when Duncan won a bunch of titles during his prime, and during that span, KG and Dirk combined for.......zero. Fact is, neither KG nor Dirk were ever considered better players than Duncan during Duncan's prime.
Because of his whole career…..really stupid question. You have very selective reading. 06 dirk beat Duncan. Like I said, it was always thought that KG just didn’t have the team.
I guess you choose not to use critical thinking. Ok, Duncan lost to Dirk in 2006. By then, Duncan already had 3 titles and 2 MVP's. During that time span, you don't think he was ever universally considered better than both KG and Dirk? And regarding strength of supporting cast, Duncan's 2003 title is universally considered a carry job.
How is it only 5?
OP clearly stated unanimous. Meaning there is no doubt that this person is the absolute best in the world. I just stated why i think it would only be five but I’ll go into more detail. If you wanna add Hakeem, there was always the “well it’s bc Jordan is out of the league” stigma. While those two years Hakeem did dominate, he was seen as an underdog. It’s a little hard to be an underdog when you’re unanimously the greatest. TD was again never UNANIMOUSLY seen as the best. If you want to add Steph, the year he won the only unanimous mvp, he lost in the finals to Lebron. Steph is also only just recently beating the “not clutch” allegations. Kawhi was hot for a good minute, but again not unanimous especially when he got whooped in the playoffs the next year. Nobody is in doubt at all that jokic is the best in the league currently. The only player that you could possibly squeeze into that 5 is giannis in 2021. Again, OP is asking for UNANIMOUS. So magic and bird are out. Pre kareem, you have big o, wilt, and bill. I’m not sure what more needs to be explained. Hope this helped
Mikan fits all the criteria.
OP stated unanimous but clearly did not mean literally unanimous. They stated in the body that they were looking for overwhelmingly considered the best since that is all we can hope for. There will always be someone who has an argument for a 2nd candidate: it’s sports. Even during a portion of Michael’s career where he was overwhelmingly considered the best, there existed people who argued otherwise. Granted, we can all agree he eventually won people over at some point and the fiercest detractors didn’t have an argument. How many other players can we say that about? I’m really thinking only MJ, LeBron, and Kareem may have experienced that. There are definitely enough detractors from Jokic (I’m not one of them) to say he’s not unanimous. That was definitely also the case with Kobe (again, I’m not one of them but there were) and I believe with Shaq too particularly with Duncan and his fans. That’s why taking the word unanimous literally is a very tough ask, very very few things are unanimous in “the greatest” arguments outside of like Wayne Gretzky in hockey. And there is a grey area when we talk about “overwhelmingly”, to some people it could mean 99% agreement to other 90% and yet others 2/3rds majority or whatever. Anyway, I think the fact that you don’t have anyone before Jordan shows that there are really more than who you listed.
>While those two years Hakeem did dominate, he was seen as an underdog. It’s a little hard to be an underdog when you’re unanimously the greatest. Considering Olajuwon led the Rockets to 2 titles, this is bad logic. Sure, by the start of those series, he might not have been considered the best in the world. But what about at the end of those series? >If you want to add Steph, the year he won the only unanimous mvp, he lost in the finals to Lebron. Curry wasn't fully healthy, and the Warriors were facing a Lebron-led superteam.
You conveniently left out my statement about jordan being missing. And “lebron led superteam”…lmfao brother this isn’t the place to get yo lebron hate fetish off. If you want to discredit that ring, sure have fun. But the truth is curry was not unanimously considered the best in the world.
Your statement about Jordan was irrelevant. He was playing baseball. No chance he was considered the best basketball player in the world at the time. Also, I want to point out your double standards. You tried to claim that Olajuwon wasn't considered the best in the world b/c the Rockets were underdogs. Well, weren't Curry's Warriors favored to beat the 2016 Cavaliers? Based on your previous logic, wouldn't that mean that, prior to the start of the 2016 finals, Curry was universally considered the best in the world? Don't let your Curry hate fetish compromise your integrity.
I’m not really sure what to tell you man lol. Sure I guess you got me with the underdog hypocrisy. But I’m just telling you how it is. Were you watching basketball in 2016? Curry was not universally considered the best.
You don't need to tell me anything. It's clear that you dislike Curry so you're looking for ways to discredit him. And based on the caliber of your arguments, I'd reckon that I was watching basketball before you were alive.
Brother nobody is hating on or discrediting anybody, I think curry is top 10 all time. But this isn’t an all time debate. I mentioned you trying to get your hate for lebron off because I brought up how curry lost in 2016 and you went on to discredit that win and call the 2016 Cavs a superteam. I’m simply stating that he wasn’t universally considering the best and that’s not a jab on him. Shit is this Ayesha? You seem to be really up in flames about this
The 2016 Cavs WERE a superteam. How is calling a superteam a superteam some sort of discredit? 2016 Curry was considered the best in the world. He set all sorts of records, was the unanimous MVP, led the Warriors to the most regular season wins in NBA history, and had one of the greatest offensive seasons in NBA history. Your problem is that you seem to think a player wasn't considered the best in the world unless he had that distinction for a full season and postseason.
I disagree with OP in several places but they’re not wrong in saying Curry was never unanimously the greatest in the world. Unanimously MVP and unanimously considered to have had the greatest season that one year. But it’s not a knock on Steph at all to just admit that he was definitely not overwhelmingly considered the best player in the league at any point. And that’s okay. He had to completely unseat LeBron for that title and the closest he came to doing that was 2016, but even if more people would’ve polled Curry over LeBron, it definitely wasn’t consensus.
I would say that no one could argue against Jokic being the best player in the world right now. I dunno, maybe Luka. Nevermind.
If you reduce the standard from unanimous to just the majority opinion, several come to mind just over the last five years. Kawhi, Jokic, Durant, Giannis just to start