list the number one players to build a contender around

[Moranis]

Since the 70's the #1 way to win championships is to have the transcendent talent in the league at that time on your team or a very deep group of All-Stars.
 
2010's - Lebron
2000's - Kobe, Shaq, Duncan
1990's - Jordan Olajuwah
1980's - Bird, Magic

Teams like 2011 Dallas, 2008 Celtics, 2004 Pistons, 1989 and 1990 Pistons and 1983 Sixers are more in line with being teams with a large group of All-Stars rather than having the transcendent singular talent of that decade.

So knowing this I would have to say the answer for future title winners that are led by a player will be Lebron, Durant and Davis and I really don't see anyone else for right now.

I think you could make a case where KG was still a transcendent player in 2008 as well as Moses Malone for the '83 Sixers (plus Dr J).

  Isiah as well. played great in big games and was the 2nd best pg in the game.

Thomas excluded, not having multiple titles during those respective stretches probably serves them a bit of an injustice.

more than that though, they didn't make it to more than 2 finals.  Heck Moses was only in one.  Garnett was in 2, the 2004 Pistons just 2.  Even the Isiah led Pistons only made 3 finals.  when you think of transcendent players, you think 4,5,6, etc. finals appearances with multiple wins, which is also why I think Hakeem is a bit of stretch (the 1 in his 2nd year and then 2 in the mid-90's). 

I mean Lebron already has 4 (with 2 wins) and is still very much in his prime.  Shaq had 6 (4-2), Duncan has 5 (4-1), Kobe has 7 (5-2), Jordan had 6 (6-0), etc.  Those are transcendent players.

[Moranis]

Since the 70's the #1 way to win championships is to have the transcendent talent in the league at that time on your team or a very deep group of All-Stars.
 
2010's - Lebron
2000's - Kobe, Shaq, Duncan
1990's - Jordan Olajuwah
1980's - Bird, Magic

Teams like 2011 Dallas, 2008 Celtics, 2004 Pistons, 1989 and 1990 Pistons and 1983 Sixers are more in line with being teams with a large group of All-Stars rather than having the transcendent singular talent of that decade.

So knowing this I would have to say the answer for future title winners that are led by a player will be Lebron, Durant and Davis and I really don't see anyone else for right now.

I think you could make a case where KG was still a transcendent player in 2008 as well as Moses Malone for the '83 Sixers (plus Dr J).

  Isiah as well. played great in big games and was the 2nd best pg in the game.

I don't think I'd call Isiah a transcendent player.  Moses probably was though even that is a bit of a stretch, I just don't see it with Isiah.

Seriously?

yep.  Finals appearances make a player transcendent.  Moses, while just the 1 finals appearance, had 3 MVP's (and he was competing for those against kareem, larry, and magic), thus even though he wasn't making the finals I think you have to give him a big boost for the MVP's, especially given his competition. 

Isiah was the best player on a team with 3 finals appearances, but he wasn't appreciably better than Dumars, Rodman, and company.  So it is tough for me there.

[D.o.s.]

Isiah was the best player on a team with 3 finals appearances, but he wasn't appreciably better than Dumars, Rodman, and company.  So it is tough for me there.

I don't agree with this bit in the slightest.

[Donoghus]

Since the 70's the #1 way to win championships is to have the transcendent talent in the league at that time on your team or a very deep group of All-Stars.
 
2010's - Lebron
2000's - Kobe, Shaq, Duncan
1990's - Jordan Olajuwah
1980's - Bird, Magic

Teams like 2011 Dallas, 2008 Celtics, 2004 Pistons, 1989 and 1990 Pistons and 1983 Sixers are more in line with being teams with a large group of All-Stars rather than having the transcendent singular talent of that decade.

So knowing this I would have to say the answer for future title winners that are led by a player will be Lebron, Durant and Davis and I really don't see anyone else for right now.

I think you could make a case where KG was still a transcendent player in 2008 as well as Moses Malone for the '83 Sixers (plus Dr J).

  Isiah as well. played great in big games and was the 2nd best pg in the game.

I don't think I'd call Isiah a transcendent player.  Moses probably was though even that is a bit of a stretch, I just don't see it with Isiah.

Seriously?

yep.  Finals appearances make a player transcendent.  Moses, while just the 1 finals appearance, had 3 MVP's (and he was competing for those against kareem, larry, and magic), thus even though he wasn't making the finals I think you have to give him a big boost for the MVP's, especially given his competition. 

Isiah was the best player on a team with 3 finals appearances, but he wasn't appreciably better than Dumars, Rodman, and company.  So it is tough for me there.

Durant only has one Finals appearance but I'd already consider him transcendent. 

I also don't think its a stretch to call the Hakeem of the mid-90s transcedent at all. 

[BballTim]

Since the 70's the #1 way to win championships is to have the transcendent talent in the league at that time on your team or a very deep group of All-Stars.
 
2010's - Lebron
2000's - Kobe, Shaq, Duncan
1990's - Jordan Olajuwah
1980's - Bird, Magic

Teams like 2011 Dallas, 2008 Celtics, 2004 Pistons, 1989 and 1990 Pistons and 1983 Sixers are more in line with being teams with a large group of All-Stars rather than having the transcendent singular talent of that decade.

So knowing this I would have to say the answer for future title winners that are led by a player will be Lebron, Durant and Davis and I really don't see anyone else for right now.

I think you could make a case where KG was still a transcendent player in 2008 as well as Moses Malone for the '83 Sixers (plus Dr J).

  Isiah as well. played great in big games and was the 2nd best pg in the game.

Thomas excluded, not having multiple titles during those respective stretches probably serves them a bit of an injustice.

more than that though, they didn't make it to more than 2 finals.  Heck Moses was only in one.  Garnett was in 2, the 2004 Pistons just 2.  Even the Isiah led Pistons only made 3 finals.  when you think of transcendent players, you think 4,5,6, etc. finals appearances with multiple wins, which is also why I think Hakeem is a bit of stretch (the 1 in his 2nd year and then 2 in the mid-90's). 

I mean Lebron already has 4 (with 2 wins) and is still very much in his prime.  Shaq had 6 (4-2), Duncan has 5 (4-1), Kobe has 7 (5-2), Jordan had 6 (6-0), etc.  Those are transcendent players.

  Stick the 80s Celts and the 90s Bulls in the east and the only way LeBron gets 4 trips to the finals is if he goes out west with his tail between his legs. Was Isiah as good as Bird or MJ? No. But then again, Kobe certainly isn't close to that level and he's on your list.

[BballTim]

Isiah was the best player on a team with 3 finals appearances, but he wasn't appreciably better than Dumars, Rodman, and company.  So it is tough for me there.

I don't agree with this bit in the slightest.

  I don't agree with it either.

[The Fawb]

The way i look at it, you need a true consistent superstar talent (>.300 WinsProduced/48) who can play a lot of minutes. This narrows the list down to the following for me:
Chris Paul   -.347 WP/48
Kevin Durant -.343 WP/48
Lebron James -.327 WP/48
Andre Drummond- .333 WP/48
Kevin Love    - .313 WP/48
Anthony Davis (in 2 yrs)- .242 WP/48
Stephen Curry  (in 2 yrs)- .251 WP/48
Lance Stephenson/Paul George (in 2 yrs)-.248/.184 WP/48

I see very little respect for what David Berri has done with the Wins Produced model for evaluating talent on this board, even though statistics have shown it has a higher correlation with actual wins in the NBA than any other stat going (due to the fact it's derived from *gasp* actual wins!).
Also anyone who doesn't think Kevin Love isn't a top 5 player overall (best PF if you don't include Lebron), doesn't  really understand basketball at its most basic level. REBOUNDS ARE DEFENSE!!!!

http://www.boxscoregeeks.com/players?direction=desc&minimum=true&sort=per48_wins_produced

[The Fawb]

Isiah was the best player on a team with 3 finals appearances, but he wasn't appreciably better than Dumars, Rodman, and company.  So it is tough for me there.

I don't agree with this bit in the slightest.

This guy is just wrong. Isiah Thomas was massively overrated and was just very inefficient. Ben Wallace and Rodman carried that team.

http://wagesofwins.com/2013/02/18/was-isiah-thomas-one-of-the-greatest-point-guards-ever/

[Moranis]

Since the 70's the #1 way to win championships is to have the transcendent talent in the league at that time on your team or a very deep group of All-Stars.
 
2010's - Lebron
2000's - Kobe, Shaq, Duncan
1990's - Jordan Olajuwah
1980's - Bird, Magic

Teams like 2011 Dallas, 2008 Celtics, 2004 Pistons, 1989 and 1990 Pistons and 1983 Sixers are more in line with being teams with a large group of All-Stars rather than having the transcendent singular talent of that decade.

So knowing this I would have to say the answer for future title winners that are led by a player will be Lebron, Durant and Davis and I really don't see anyone else for right now.

I think you could make a case where KG was still a transcendent player in 2008 as well as Moses Malone for the '83 Sixers (plus Dr J).

  Isiah as well. played great in big games and was the 2nd best pg in the game.

I don't think I'd call Isiah a transcendent player.  Moses probably was though even that is a bit of a stretch, I just don't see it with Isiah.

Seriously?

yep.  Finals appearances make a player transcendent.  Moses, while just the 1 finals appearance, had 3 MVP's (and he was competing for those against kareem, larry, and magic), thus even though he wasn't making the finals I think you have to give him a big boost for the MVP's, especially given his competition. 

Isiah was the best player on a team with 3 finals appearances, but he wasn't appreciably better than Dumars, Rodman, and company.  So it is tough for me there.

Durant only has one Finals appearance but I'd already consider him transcendent. 

I also don't think its a stretch to call the Hakeem of the mid-90s transcedent at all.

Durant is a great player that could become a transcendent player, but at this point he isn't.  Was Karl Malone a transcendent player?  At this point that is what Durant is.  A great player, but not a transcendent one.  He could certainly get there as he is just before or just entering his prime and should win the MVP this year, but he is going to have to win multiple titles to become a transcendent player, you know a guy that is in that special room in the HOF.  He isn't there yet. 

[Moranis]

The clear transcendent players are:

Russell
Chamberlain
Kareem
Magic
Bird
Jordan
Shaq
Kobe
Duncan
Lebron


I think you could make strong arguments for:

The Big O
Moses
Dr. J. (though unfortunately much of his time was ABA)
Hakeem


I think those 14 players have clearly separated themselves from the rest of the field.

[BballTim]

Isiah was the best player on a team with 3 finals appearances, but he wasn't appreciably better than Dumars, Rodman, and company.  So it is tough for me there.

I don't agree with this bit in the slightest.

This guy is just wrong. Isiah Thomas was massively overrated and was just very inefficient. Ben Wallace and Rodman carried that team.

http://wagesofwins.com/2013/02/18/was-isiah-thomas-one-of-the-greatest-point-guards-ever/

  I doubt that a single person who watched the Pistons in that era would agree with his assessment of Isiah.

  I've been on this blog for close to 10 years. When I started coming here I watched a lot of basketball but wasn't much of a stats guy, especially advanced stats. I got into some interesting discussions about the numbers and for a while I thought they were the coolest thing since sliced bread. I now frequently cringe when I see them cited because knowing the stats is seen as a substitute for having any idea what you're looking at when you watch a game.

  It's hard to say which is truly more absurd, that players like Rodman and Laimbeer carried the team or that many of the point guards listed (Mookie? Miller? Bogues?) were better players than Thomas. Again, I'd hope anyone who believes that is too young to have seen the games back then.

[BballTim]

Since the 70's the #1 way to win championships is to have the transcendent talent in the league at that time on your team or a very deep group of All-Stars.
 
2010's - Lebron
2000's - Kobe, Shaq, Duncan
1990's - Jordan Olajuwah
1980's - Bird, Magic

Teams like 2011 Dallas, 2008 Celtics, 2004 Pistons, 1989 and 1990 Pistons and 1983 Sixers are more in line with being teams with a large group of All-Stars rather than having the transcendent singular talent of that decade.

So knowing this I would have to say the answer for future title winners that are led by a player will be Lebron, Durant and Davis and I really don't see anyone else for right now.

I think you could make a case where KG was still a transcendent player in 2008 as well as Moses Malone for the '83 Sixers (plus Dr J).

  Isiah as well. played great in big games and was the 2nd best pg in the game.

I don't think I'd call Isiah a transcendent player.  Moses probably was though even that is a bit of a stretch, I just don't see it with Isiah.

Seriously?

yep.  Finals appearances make a player transcendent.  Moses, while just the 1 finals appearance, had 3 MVP's (and he was competing for those against kareem, larry, and magic), thus even though he wasn't making the finals I think you have to give him a big boost for the MVP's, especially given his competition. 

Isiah was the best player on a team with 3 finals appearances, but he wasn't appreciably better than Dumars, Rodman, and company.  So it is tough for me there.

Durant only has one Finals appearance but I'd already consider him transcendent. 

I also don't think its a stretch to call the Hakeem of the mid-90s transcedent at all.

Durant is a great player that could become a transcendent player, but at this point he isn't.  Was Karl Malone a transcendent player?  At this point that is what Durant is.  A great player, but not a transcendent one.  He could certainly get there as he is just before or just entering his prime and should win the MVP this year, but he is going to have to win multiple titles to become a transcendent player, you know a guy that is in that special room in the HOF.  He isn't there yet.

  You're making your determination about whether a player's transcendent or not based upon a fairly arbitrary standard that's fairly dependent upon things like health, quality of teammates and quality of opponents. Take Kobe, for instance. Shaq was the best player during the three-peat, Kobe was the best player on the 09 and 10 title teams. So clearly Kobe's a transcendent player. Unless KG doesn't hurt his knee, the Celts go on a three-peat and he's never the best player on a title team. Or they don't swing the Pau trade. So the exact same player can play at the exact same level for his entire career and whether or not he's on a list of transcendent players is dependent on events that happen to other players on other teams.

[Dog_Lover106]

The clear transcendent players are:

Russell
Chamberlain
Kareem
Magic
Bird
Jordan
Shaq
Kobe
Duncan
Lebron


I think you could make strong arguments for:

The Big O
Moses
Dr. J. (though unfortunately much of his time was ABA)
Hakeem


I think those 14 players have clearly separated themselves from the rest of the field.

Since this has evolved into an all time list. Baylor, West and Havlicek are worthy. Baylor and West would of one multiple titles except for one obvious problem. Havlicek won multiple titles with two completely different teams.

But since no one mentioned longevity as a requirement, please examine 1976-1978 where Bill Walton played a year and a half stretch of some of the most dominate basketball every seen in the NBA.

Bob Ryan, who has forgotten more NBA basketball than we collectively know, still maintains that a healthy Bill Walton would be his first all time player selection to suit up for a deciding game seven.

If you did not see the 1977 NBA finals or the first 60 games of 1978 season (Blazers were 50-10) before Walton broke his foot, you missed one of the greatest players ever.

Also, Walton went over 5 years from his junior year in HS to senior year at UCLA without losing a single game. Greatest college player in history IMO and was simply amazing for just over one year with the Trailblazers.

[D.o.s.]

The way i look at it, you need a true consistent superstar talent (>.300 WinsProduced/48) who can play a lot of minutes. This narrows the list down to the following for me:
Chris Paul   -.347 WP/48
Kevin Durant -.343 WP/48
Lebron James -.327 WP/48
Andre Drummond- .333 WP/48
Kevin Love    - .313 WP/48
Anthony Davis (in 2 yrs)- .242 WP/48
Stephen Curry  (in 2 yrs)- .251 WP/48
Lance Stephenson/Paul George (in 2 yrs)-.248/.184 WP/48

I see very little respect for what David Berri has done with the Wins Produced model for evaluating talent on this board, even though statistics have shown it has a higher correlation with actual wins in the NBA than any other stat going (due to the fact it's derived from *gasp* actual wins!).
Also anyone who doesn't think Kevin Love isn't a top 5 player overall (best PF if you don't include Lebron), doesn't  really understand basketball at its most basic level. REBOUNDS ARE DEFENSE!!!!

http://www.boxscoregeeks.com/players?direction=desc&minimum=true&sort=per48_wins_produced

I question any metric derived from winning that subsequently rates Kevin Love highly.

[D.o.s.]

Isiah was the best player on a team with 3 finals appearances, but he wasn't appreciably better than Dumars, Rodman, and company.  So it is tough for me there.

I don't agree with this bit in the slightest.

This guy is just wrong. Isiah Thomas was massively overrated and was just very inefficient. Ben Wallace and Rodman carried that team.

http://wagesofwins.com/2013/02/18/was-isiah-thomas-one-of-the-greatest-point-guards-ever/

A) You're adorable.

B) Winshares/48 is nice, but not the definitive metric.

C) You're way too reliant on numbers to craft your entire narrative, rather than letting the numbers embellish the story with factual information.

D) Ben Wallace wasn't on the Bad Boy Pistons. If you're going to say someone's wrong, please try to at least get the players right - you're looking for "Bill Laimbeer"