Getting one's GOAT

by user DNL

In a thread about LeBron James, Davis21wylie suggested that James may pass Michael Jordan for the swanky title of GOAT, or "Greatest of All Time." I wonder, what athletes are worthy of the GOAT tag? I assume that you can have more than one, and probably more than one per league (e.g. Babe Ruth would cover batters, but not pitchers; Jerry Rice would cover receivers and maybe offensive players, but not linebackers).

Ruth, Rice, and Jordan are obvious. So is Lance Armstrong. Not being a hockey fan, I'll defer on Wayne Gretzky; same goes for boxing and Muhammed Ali.

For a lot of sports and subcategories, it's too close to call. I can't take Pete Sampras over Rod Laver with any consistency, nor Tiger Woods over Jack Nicklaus. Forget things like quarterback or starting pitcher.

I'll leave it to the community to hash this one out.

Date

Mon 05/22/06, 11:47 am EST

XtinctWaterboy

789 days ago

Score 0

For the exact reasons you state, I don't know if it's possible to have a greatest of all time in team sports....

Permalink | Reply

Alex HolowczakMVP

789 days ago

Score 0

Snooker's GOAT is Stephen Hendry, Cricket's is Don Bradman, Formula One's is Michael Schumacher.

Permalink | Reply

ChachiOSUDraft Pick

789 days ago

Score 2

I think the toughest thing of defining the GOAT of any sport is that the different eras in each sport had different rules, different styles of play, different nutritional and conditioning advantages, and different amounts of teams and players. With no consistancy, it is difficult to develop a standard by which to measure players.

Permalink | Reply

MetsJetsDevilsDraft Pick

789 days ago

Score -5

Baseball's GOAT is ARod when he is up with bases loaded and only 1 out in a 1 run game in the bottom of the 8th.

Permalink | Reply

DNLLegend

789 days ago

Score 0

Chachi, I think you have to keep everyone in their own temporal context. Ruth was lightyears ahead of everyone else, making it no contest.

Permalink | Reply

ChachiOSUDraft Pick

789 days ago

Score 1

I agree with Ruth, but what about a Jordan vs. Chamberlain or Robertson arguement? What about in golf and tennis and the use of better equipment? You can say who dominated their decade or era, but the GOAT is far more difficult, perhaps impossible, thing to define. Except for Ruth, he was the MAN!

Permalink | Reply

DammskippySoccer Kid

789 days ago

Score 2

Absolutely! Where would A-Rod be without the Babe.. or Jordan be without Dr. J before him? I tend to lean toward the early greats because they did it first and without the huge contracts.

Permalink | Reply

DammskippySoccer Kid

789 days ago

Score 4

Where would Bonds be without Canseco?

Permalink | Reply

Kj68daySoccer Kid

789 days ago

Score 0

Although you have to completely respect the greats who came before you, I think it should be considered that with every new era the athletes get bigger and stronger and faster, not just the great ones either, its everyone. So keeping that in mind, to think of the dominance that Lebron and Tiger and Federer display TODAY, could not be equaled simply because of the competition that they deal with on a daily basis. Oscar Robertson and The Babe were phenomenal but just didn't have the same competition of today, so you gotta give the new greats the edge.

Permalink | Reply

Ray agmJV Squad

789 days ago

Score 3

Let's just call it GATT: Greatest At This Time.

Permalink | Reply

XinophDraft Pick

789 days ago

Score -1

Actually, I would tend to say that Ruth and Jordan are both debateable; they had their strengths and weaknesses, and there were certainly players better than them in a variety of categories (and I don't mean different positions). There are a few players worth mentioning who are close to as good as Ruth, if not as good, they just weren't as popular as the Babe, so today they don't get the play they used to.

Permalink | Reply

Davis21wylieAll-Star

789 days ago

Score -1

I've heard convincing arguments for Mario Lemieux over Gretzky as hockey's GOAT. As in, Gretzky never had to deal with cancer... Gretzky never had chronic back issues (all Gary Suter cross-checks aside)... Gretzky was playing with Mark Messier, Jari Kurri, Paul Coffey, and Glenn Anderson while Mario was saddled with the likes of Moe Mantha and Terry Ruskowski... Wayne racked up his gaudiest stats (92 G, 215 Pts) before Lemieux really hit the scene -- in the early Eighties, when your grandmother could practically score 40 goals... I'm not saying I buy it, but Lemieux's combo of size, skill, and hockey sense probably trumps the Great One on a neutral playing field, er, rink.

Permalink | Reply

DammskippySoccer Kid

789 days ago

Score 0

I think many give the new greats the edge because they are tangible. We can see them play and watch their careers unfold,therefore, giving us more of an emotional tie to them. I theorize that if we could jump into a time machine and watch them in person we'd give the "old greats" more credit.

Permalink | Reply

MetsJetsDevilsDraft Pick

789 days ago

Score 0

Lemiuex was a goal scorer. He was a one dimensional player, but he was great at it. He was a defensive liability, and did noy make the players around him better like the Great one did. No one in history has seen the ice better than Wayne. That is why he is the greatest player ever, followed by Bobby Orr followed by Mario.

Permalink | Reply

PeanMajor Leaguer

789 days ago

Score 3

Jeremey Roenick was definitely the GOAT in NHL 93 for Genesis

Permalink | Reply

Kj68daySoccer Kid

789 days ago

Score 4

I think it is important to differentiate between the inovators of the past, and the more physically imposing athletes of today who have imitated the inovators. While without the former inovators nothing we see today in sport would exist, the athletes of today are so imposing and so talented. Take baseball for example, the brilliant plays by dimaggio and mays are much more common today. What was great then is now ordinary. No football player from the 60's and 70's would argue that they could dominate the same way they did then against todays athletes. With that in mind, always respect the inovators.

Permalink | Reply

ChachiOSUDraft Pick

789 days ago

Score 2

Then that makes Bo Jackson the GOAT of Tecmo Bowl. Possibly the most dominant video game athlete ever!

Permalink | Reply

PeanMajor Leaguer

789 days ago

Score -2

i think we have an old article on that

http://www.a...Athlete_Ever

Permalink | Reply

PeanMajor Leaguer

789 days ago

Score -3

<a href=http://www.a...Athlete_Ever>http://www.armchairgm.com/mwiki/index.php?title=Best_Video_Game_Athlete_Ever</a>

Permalink | Reply

DammskippySoccer Kid

789 days ago

Score 0

Kj, I totally agree with that. So I guess the real argument is what is greater? The innovators who changed the sport or the immitative superior athletes who make it look so easy?

Permalink | Reply

Kj68daySoccer Kid

789 days ago

Score 1

Well I think that while more respect should be given to the innovator, when it gets down to head to head comparison of athlete v. athlete, to immitator whom has superior athleticism wins the head to head battle with few exceptions.

Permalink | Reply

DammskippySoccer Kid

789 days ago

Score 2

Is that what greatness is? Beating someone in a head to head matchup? I think it's much more than what their stats are and how many championships they logged, but how they did it that makes them great. That's why Bird can be compared to Magic even though he wasn't nearly the athletic specimen.

Permalink | Reply