RealGM Top 100 List #73

Post #1 » by **penbeast0** » Sat Jan 17, 2015 1:51 pm

PG: Tim Hardaway and Mark Price are the best long peak guys left, Nate Archibald and Penny Hardaway are the main short peak guys. I haven't looked at Tony Parker properly, if anyone wants to fun him against the others.

Wings: I am leaning toward a forward right now . . .

Defensive stalwarts: Ben Wallace, Dennis Rodman, Larry Nance, Bobby Jones, Shawn Marion (should add Horace Grant and Rasheed Wallace here too . . . )

Spoiler:

Comparing 4 guys known as scoring 3's: Carmelo Anthony, Billy Cunningham, Marques Johnson, James Worthy (should get around to adding Chris Mullin and Glen Rice to the mix, maybe even Jamaal Wilkes or Bobby Dandridge).

Spoiler:

Best bigs left: My favorite is Mel Daniels with his 2 ABA MVPs and 3 rings (2 as clearly the best player) -- played like Alonzo Mourning offensively and Moses defensively -- but his weaknesses (and the weakness of the early ABA) are problematic. Bill Walton and Connie Hawkins are super short, super peak guys. Neil Johnston, Amare, Dan Issel, Jerry Lucas, and Spencer Haywood have offensive creds but bigs who don't play good defense are problematic for me. Even Zelmo Beaty, Elton Brand, Chris Bosh, Chris Webber, and Yao Ming are on my radar.

Jerry Lucas, Mel Daniels, Bobby Jones, and Shawn Marion are the main guys on my list right now. Lucas was a great rebounder, outstanding secondary scorer with stretch the floor range and good passing skills. Not a good defender though willing; did a good job post prime taking over for injured Willis Reed and playing most of the center minutes on the Knicks second title team. Daniels is a 2 time ABA MVP; I'd take him over the flashier numbers of Neil Johnston and the 50s bigs because even though the early ABA isn't strong, it was better than the 50s NBA, super warrior type, short career arc. Jones is a great glue guy who gave up minutes and starting roles to help his team, still is the all-time record holder with the most 1st team All-Def awards, very efficient high energy, good passing, nice midrange . . . was the best player on the best team in 1975 ABA without great help (Denver had a better record than either Erving's Nets or Gilmore's Colonels) who made Larry Brown's jump and switch defense into a winner, limited minutes player is his main weakness (and not a good rebounder for a 4). Marion has a long career as one of the great offball slashers and wing rebounders of all time, versatile, was clearly the second best player (better than Amare who got all the awards) on those Nash led Sun teams -- Suns didn't miss a beat when Amare went down; and did a great job on LeBron in Dallas's title run.

I guess I will tentatively vote for Bobby Jones for his versatility, willingness to sacrifice glory for team, and just being the epitome of what basketball should be about. If it's about winning rather than stats, Jones is your poster boy.

Post #2 » by **trex_8063** » Sat Jan 17, 2015 8:01 pm

Am feeling less strongly about Chris Webber, so am exploring other options. As alluded to in last thread, I'd like to have a look at Tony Parker.

There's a lot positive to be said for him. In the last 12 seasons (not counting this current one) he's been no less than the 3rd-best---often the 2nd-best---player on FOUR title teams. He's been no less than 3rd-best on.....well, 10-11 contenders (because the Spurs have legitimately been contenders nearly every season of his career); and in the case of '12, at the very least, you can make an argument he was actually the #1 guy (at least a #1A/1B scenario) on a contender-level squad.

His rs stats over that 12-year span (863 rs games):
17.8 ppg/6.1 apg/2.6 tov @ 55.4% ts
19.7 PER, .156 WS/48, 110 ORtg/104 DRtg (+6) in 32.9 mpg

And he did this for what is generally one of the best and most balanced teams in the league.
He's fantastic at breaking guys down off the dribble (for his career 35.8% of his fga are from inside 3 ft), an outstanding finisher (career 65.4% from <3ft), and really a very good mid-range pull-up shooter, too. I have little doubt that a peak Tony Parker could have annually been putting up 21-24 ppg on decent efficiency for a lesser team.

wrt post-season, I think his playoff woes get marginally over-stated. His ps numbers over this same span do take a bit of a dip; however, closer scrutiny reveals that it's in a large part due to TWO bad playoff years ('03 and '05). If we look at the other TEN seasons in this span, his playoff numbers are:

19.04 PER, .103 WS/48 in 35.8 mpg. This is at worst a typical post-season dip that we see from most players.

On the grandest stage (the Finals), he's had some poor performances, though he does have at least one very very nice finals performance in '07: 24.5 ppg/5.0/3.3 apg/3.0 tov @ 59.5% ts (Finals MVP).
And really, he was pretty good last year in the finals, too: 18.0 ppg/4.6 apg/2.0 tov @ 55.0% ts (non-existent rebounding, although you're not really counting on boards from your PG anyway).

I don't think DRtg (and thus ORtg/DRtg comparisons) really do him justice, as DRtg has a somewhat causal relationship with not only steals/blocks (which he doesn't get many of), but also defensive rebounds (which he's not a very good rebounding PG-->not really a big slam on him, because......PG; it's typically the least relevant skill/attribute for a PG).

Generally I would say Parker appears "checked in" on defense, certainly not a huge liability on that end (like say....certain years of Steve Nash, or Derrick Rose, whose defensive effort is abominable at times).

Non-scaled PI DRAPM for Parker:
'03--> +0.9
'04--> +0.5
'05--> -0.2
'06--> +0.9
'07--> -2.2
'08--> +1.01
'09--> +0.48
'10--> -0.21
'11--> -0.44
'12--> +1.16
'13--> +1.06
'14--> +0.20

Aside from one poor year in '07, he generally appears entirely decent defensively based on impact data (particularly for a PG).

His best 3-year and best 5-year combined PI RAPM marks are similar to guys like Tracy McGrady and Kevin Durant, and a little better than Pau Gasol.

I'm not sure yet, but am seriously considering casting vote for Tony Parker. Others I could consider (aside from Chris Webber) pending where support seems to lie include: Hal Greer, Tiny Archibald, or maybe Chris Bosh.

ronnymac2 · Post #3 » by **ronnymac2** » Sat Jan 17, 2015 10:44 pm

Vote: Nate "Tiny" Archibald

Unguardable in his prime. He's got 4 seasons where he averages at least 24.8 points and 6.8 assists. He later became the heady leader of a multi-polar Boston Celtic squad which contended throughout Nate's time there, peaking with a title in 1981. Excellent free throw shooter, unselfish, and doesn't have problems other 1970s stars had aside from injuries.

RSCD3_ · Post #4 » by **RSCD3_** » Sun Jan 18, 2015 12:18 am

Players im considering

Chris Bosh
Horace Grant
Dennis rodman

SinceGatlingWasARookie · Post #5 » by **SinceGatlingWasARookie** » Sun Jan 18, 2015 1:06 am

We could compare Nate Archibald to Tony Parker. Parker is listed at 6' 2" but is probably smaller than that. Archibald is listed at 6' 1" but is definitely smaller than that. Both players score well in the paint by using speed, creativity dribbling and shooting touch to get shots past the big men.

Parker is the more efficient scorer. Pre injury Archibald was the higher volume scorer. Archibald was the better passer.

Should being on a good team be raise or lower our opinion of Parker compared to Archibald? Do we know Parker is good because the Spurs are good and Archibald was bad when the Royals/Kings were bad? Parker benefitted from great teammates and great 3 point shooting teams spacing the floor. Then again Parker could have scored more if he did not have to share the ball as much but Parker's efficiency would have been lower if he had to score more and had lower quality teammates.

Do any of us know anything about peak Archibald's defense?

Can anybody tell me why these Kings win 44 games http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/KCO/1975.html , these Kings win 31 games http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/KCK/1976.html and these Kings win 40 games http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/KCK/1977.html ? Phil Johnson was the coach of all 3 teams. how does Phil Johnson effect Archibald. The last team replaces Archibald and Walker with Taylor and Boone. How does the decision to let Center Sam Lacey handle the ball and be a passer effect Archibald?

Peak Archibald is coached by Cousy.
Future Coaches Matt Goukas, Mike D'Antoni and Rick Addelman were back up guards behind Archibald and Walker.

Post #6 » by **Quotatious** » Sun Jan 18, 2015 3:12 am

RSCD3_ wrote:Players im considering

Chris Bosh
Horace Grant
Dennis rodman

Rodman won the previous thread.

Vote: Tiny Archibald. Same reasoning as before. Higher peak than anyone left not named Bill Walton (but much better longevity than Walton), one of only two players in NBA history who led the league in scoring and assists in the same season, 6-time All-Star, 3-time All-NBA 1st team, 2-time All-NBA 2nd team choice, 54th in career MVP shares (finished in the top 10 five times, even as high as 3rd in 1973). His peak numbers certainly weren't "empty", as his 34 points and over 11 assists per game led the Kings to the best offense in the league - that team just wasn't good enough on defense to make the playoffs). Averaged about 27/3/8 (54.5% TS, 22.0 PER) between 1972 and 1977 (four healthy seasons, when he played at least 76 games in each of these 4 seasons, and two more with 34 and 35 games).
Finally, he was a key part of the Celtics championship team in 1981, being able to reinvent his game after injuries robbed him of a lot of his youthful athleticism, and a savvy veteran/leader.

Post #7 » by **Doctor MJ** » Sun Jan 18, 2015 8:36 am

Vote: Bobby Jones

With Rodman getting in, it seems to say to me that people willing to really look at guys who are not traditional stars at this point. Consider Jones then. Far more well rounded player, similarly respect on defense and actually a very nice offensive player too with major positive intangibles instead of being a wacko who can quit on his team.

Post #8 » by **Moonbeam** » Sun Jan 18, 2015 9:39 am

Nice write-up on Parker, trex. He's on my radar soon. Still going with James Worthy.

Spoiler:

Clearly he was never the most important player on any of the Lakers' teams while Magic was around, but what an awesome piece he was nonetheless - very skilled, dangerous scorer who elevated his game when the moment called for it, not just in the playoffs, but in the regular season, too.

In head-to-head comparisons of against other leading 80s small forwards (Bird, Erving, Dantley, English, Aguirre, King, Marques Johnson, Nique), here are some summary stats taken from this spreadsheet:

131 wins, 64 losses on +1.47 SRS above expectations (ranks #1 out of 9)
Relative PPG up 1.23, opponent relative PPG down 1.25 (net -4.03 PPG vs. opponent, rank #9 of 9)
Relative RPG up 0.20, opponent relative RPG up 0.27 (only available from 1986 on, net -0.29 RPG vs. opponent)
Relative APG up 0.20, opponent relative APG down 0.38 (only available from 1986 on, net -0.24 APG vs. opponent)
TS down 0.05%, opponent TS down 0.38% (net +2.59% TS vs. opponent, rank #2 of 9)

So while Worthy tended to be outscored by big-time SFs (though he had a sizable edge in efficiency), he increased his scoring output and his opponents saw a dip in their output and efficiency, and there was no real difference in rebounds or assists. It appears that "Big Game James" had a notable bump in his production and a notable decrease in that of his opponents, even during the regular season.

Win shares aren't overly kind of Worthy in comparison to others - he's got a career WS/48 of 0.130, with about 63% coming on the offensive end. I did a comparison of offensive win shares for the 80s small forwards here, investigating whether they were perhaps poaching them from teammates, or rather providing lift. Well, in Worthy's case, his teammates seemed to generally far outperform their expectations with respect to offensive win shares. A lot of that credit should go to Magic, obviously, but Worthy's deadly scoring was a key part of their offense's success, I feel.

As a playoff performer, there are few who have raised their games quite like Worthy. I think in the playoffs, he became a legitimate top 10 player in the league for several years. He produced a playoff O+ from 1985 onward of 8.07 (12.05 from 1985-89) on a Score+ of 2.072 (3.338 from 1985-89), and those are obviously big sample sizes, and those career numbers are likely to go up if we include his 1984 season.

SinceGatlingWasARookie · Post #9 » by **SinceGatlingWasARookie** » Sun Jan 18, 2015 9:51 am

I think this is too soon for Bobby Jones. He had good defensive timing and an accurate mid range shot.
I remember him as something like a cross between Tayshaun Prince, David Lee and Kirilenko but with an accurate mid range shot.

Post #10 » by **trex_8063** » Sun Jan 18, 2015 4:44 pm

SinceGatlingWasARookie wrote:We could compare Nate Archibald to Tony Parker. Parker is listed at 6' 2" but is probably smaller than that. Archibald is listed at 6' 1" but is definitely smaller than that. Both players score well in the paint by using speed, creativity dribbling and shooting touch to get shots past the big men.

Parker is the more efficient scorer. Pre injury Archibald was the higher volume scorer. Archibald was the better passer.

I disagree with the bolded. I don't think we can fairly label Parker the more efficient scorer. I've got to give Tiny his due credit here: his career ts% is 54.35%, and much of this before the existence of a 3-pt line. League average over same span of years was 51.87%: he's +2.48% ts for his career.
Parker thru '14 is 55.08% ts for his career; league average over same span was 53.34%, so he's +1.74% to league.
They have similar high/peak marks in both raw ts% and relative ts%, too (but Tiny's best mark in relative ts% came on bigger volume and in a year before the 3pt line).

So I'd more or less call it a wash on efficiency, and if I anything I'd give the small edge to Tiny.
Agree (obviously) about pre-injury tiny being the bigger volume scorer, and possibly also agree about him being the better play-maker (though I don't think it's by any big margin).

SinceGatlingWasARookie wrote:Do any of us know anything about peak Archibald's defense?

Speaking for myself: not a lot. I don't recall ever reading anything about his defense being special in any way, so take that for what it's worth. He did not come up with an abundance of steals (once they were recorded). And given his size, I cannot help but think he was probably a bit "limited" defensively, and a potential liability.

SinceGatlingWasARookie wrote:Can anybody tell me why these Kings win 44 games http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/KCO/1975.html , these Kings win 31 games http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/KCK/1976.html and these Kings win 40 games http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/KCK/1977.html ? Phil Johnson coached all 3 teams....

It's an interesting question, and one that doesn't reflect well on Tiny, imo (that he can be replaced by Ron Boone, and the Kings don't miss a beat).

Here's how this comparison breaks down for me.....
Tiny was a better scorer by a solid (albeit not huge) margin, and likely (though not certain) a marginally better play-maker, and he did these things in any era before the 3pt line and while playing massive minutes in a couple of those years. Tony's a better rebounder (though obv this is a very minor point), and I'd have to give Parker the edge as a defender based on the limited info I have for Archibald. But given probably the two most important features you need/want in a PG or passing and scoring, I give Archibald the solid edge for peak.

But as I've stated before, I'm a total career value guy. If you want a visual representation of my method/criteria, you can think of it like a plot-point graph: the years/seasons are along the bottom/horizontal axis, and degree of dominance/impact/etc is along the vertical axis. And each season a point gets plotted on this graph; and then we can draw a line connecting all the points on the graph, and color in the area under that line. Whoever has the largest area under the curve had the better career, or at least that's essentially my starting point for ranking them; then adjustments are made based on strength of era, and further factors such as influence on evolution of game, other legacy points, narratives, contextual details, intangibles, etc, can nudge them a bit in one direction or the other.

With that in mind, Parker's prime could (perhaps somewhat liberally) be defined as '03-'14: 12 seasons, 863 rs games. Tiny's entire career was just 876 rs games, and likely less than half of that was pre-injury prime years. Parker doesn't have anything that can touch Tiny's '73 season. However, he perhaps does have 1 or 2 seasons which can be compared to '72 Archibald (Tiny's 2nd-best season). And he does have like 3-4 years that are roughly on par with (or better than??) Tiny's 3rd-best season. And if we back down further, Parker's probably got TWELVE full seasons which are better than Tiny's 6th-best year.

Overall, I think Tony's just got a little more value "under the curve" than Tiny does.

Tiny also doesn't have much of an imprint in NBA playoffs, which we can argue is to some degree luck, but otoh: it is what it is.

SinceGatlingWasARookie · Post #11 » by **SinceGatlingWasARookie** » Sun Jan 18, 2015 6:33 pm

List of the remaining career high volume efficient scorers

This list is about who scored the most points per game efficiently ( ts% over 55 ).
I am only listing players not already on our list. Number is where they rank on this list.

24: Mitch Richmond
26: Dan Issell
27: Amare Stoudemire
28: Walt Bellamy
29: Marques Johnson
32: Kiki Vandeweghe
34: Chris Bosh
35: Brad Daugherty
36: Michael Redd
38: Walter Davis
42: Glen Rice
44: Chris Mullin
45: Rolando Blackmon
48: James Worthy
49: Deron Williams
50: Kelly Tripuka

53: Larry Nance

54: Tony Parker
55: Peja Stojakovic
57: Carlos Boozer
58: Larry Johnson
59: Joe Dumars
60: Correy Maggette
61: Orlando Woolridge
62: Dale Ellis
64: Paul Westphal
66: David Lee
67: Mark Price
68: Jason Terry
69: Rashard Lewis
70: Ricky Pierce

Post #12 » by **Quotatious** » Sun Jan 18, 2015 6:46 pm

Seeing Bobby Jones getting traction here, I think it's time to seriously consider Horace Grant and Rasheed Wallace (peak-wise, even Andrei Kirilenko is more or less in the same class, although I think that his career isn't impressive enough to make the top 100). Obviously Shawn Marion, too.

Jones is more decorated than all of those guys, and a clearly more efficient scorer, career-wise, but I'm not sure if their accolades really reflect how good they were - for example Bobby made the All-Defensive 1st team nine times (plus one second team), Matrix never made an All-Defensive team, which is a travesty.

Also, 1977 Jones vs 1992 Grant vs 2004 Kirilenko seems like a great comparison. Extremely close, at first glance. I'd take 2006 Marion over all of them. Not sure how I feel about Sheed, but he may've been better than all of them except Marion (numbers-wise, he's not that impressive, but his skillset and non-boxscore impact was great). Horace might get underrated, but his longevity is pretty good, and he was an excellent playoff performer (even better playoff than RS performer).

Tiny Archibald, James Worthy and Chris Bosh are my top 3 candidates right now (plus maybe Tony Parker and Carmelo Anthony), I just still prefer to vote for more traditional stars at this point, but it's very possible that Marion, Jones and Grant would all make my top 80, at least that's how I feel about it right now (I've never really put together a GOAT list that long, so I'm just going spot-by-spot here, not having any big picture to look at).

SinceGatlingWasARookie · Post #13 » by **SinceGatlingWasARookie** » Sun Jan 18, 2015 8:43 pm

I think I would also take Marion over Kirilenko, Bobby Jones and Grant.

At Power Forward I am thinking about Terry Cummings, Kevin Willis, Buck Williams, Amare Stodamire and Otis Thorpe.
There are 1950s and 60s players left high on the career PER list but I have a bias against that era because of how I perceive the quality of that era to be weak.

Walt Bellamy has the stats to be considered here. It is time for me to look at Bellamy film to decide how much to hold the level of competition against Bellamy. If I was basing my decision on stats then Bellamy should probably get in now.

Bill Walton is still not in this list yet. I think Bill Walton should get in before Bobby Jones.
I might want Marques Johnson in before Jones.

Maybe Kevin Durant should get in despite only playing a few years.

Post #14 » by **trex_8063** » Sun Jan 18, 2015 8:55 pm

Man, I just don't know who I want to go with. Leaning Parker still (unless a sudden surge of support for CWebb appeared), but Owly and Quotatious have me taking closer looks at Bosh, Marion, and Larry Nance; and tbh they all look like very good candidates.

Post #15 » by **trex_8063** » Sun Jan 18, 2015 8:58 pm

SinceGatlingWasARookie wrote:I think I would also take Marion over Kirilenko, Bobby Jones and Grant.

At Power Forward I am thinking about Terry Cummings, Kevin Willis, Amare Stodamire and Otis Thorpe.
There are 1950s and 60s players left high on the career PER list but I have a bias against that era because of how I perceive the quality of that era to be weak.

Walt Bellamy has the stats to be considered here. It is time for me to look at Bellamy film to decide how much to hold the level of competition against Bellamy. If I was basing my decision on stats then Bellamy should probably get in now.

Bill Walton is still not in this list yet. I think Bill Walton should get in before Bobby Jones.
I might want Marques Johnson in before Jones.

Maybe Kevin Durant should get in despite only play a few years.

Durant already is in (#36), riding on the strength of FIVE elite-level seasons he's got under his belt, including one which is absolutely in the running for distinction as the GOAT pure-scorer season.

SinceGatlingWasARookie · Post #16 » by **SinceGatlingWasARookie** » Sun Jan 18, 2015 9:14 pm

Thanks. I am glad Durant is in at 36. With me favoring Peaks over Longevity to my thinking Durant had to be in. There might be somebody else young and playing currently that should be considered soon.

Carmelo Anthony vs Bobby Jones is an interesting question. I think I take Carmelo. I do respect Bobby Jones for some of the same reasons I respect Draymond Green.

Carmelo has played enough seasons that I don't think of him as a young guy with an incomplete career.

SinceGatlingWasARookie · Post #17 » by **SinceGatlingWasARookie** » Sun Jan 18, 2015 9:28 pm

The PER stat likes Neil Johnston, Blake Griffin and Kevin Love

Post #18 » by **trex_8063** » Sun Jan 18, 2015 9:58 pm

SinceGatlingWasARookie wrote:Thanks. I am glad Durant is in at 36. With me favoring Peaks over Longevity to my thinking Durant had to be in. There might be somebody else young and playing currently that should be considered soon.
.

Durant getting in at #36 isn't just a peak thing. I put a lot of value in longevity, being a "total career value" guy......and even I think #36 is perfectly reasonable for him. He's got FIVE seasons as no worse than top 5 player in the league (usually #2, and arguably #1 in '14). There aren't a lot of players you can say that about.

His peak, imo, is almost undeniably top 20 all-time (perhaps arguably top 15).

Post #19 » by **trex_8063** » Sun Jan 18, 2015 10:37 pm

Since I was just talking about "total career value" today, I've been dinking around with a new formula to try and quantify this. I've got others, but they're very complex and still works in progress; was thinking of something simple, for sort of a baseline number.

Initially was going with the following formula (career rs numbers, fwiw):

(PER-15)*(WS/48-0.1)*mpg*games played.....which simplifies to (PER-15)*(WS/48-0.1)*minutes played

Probably self-explanatory, but the premise of the "-15" and "-0.1" is that league avg PER is 15, league avg WS/48 is 0.100. So the above formula gets at their value over league average per game, multiplied by the number of games they played.

Major flaw I noted about the above was that if someone happened to have either one of WS/48 or PER that's below avg.....they'd get a negative number. AND their score would get worse if the one that's above average is higher. e.g. someone with a PER 17 and WS/48 of 0.095 would have a worse (more negative) score than someone with a PER of 16 and WS/48 of 0.095. And if someone happened to have BOTH metrics below average, they'd get a positive score. :sad:

So I altered it to be ADDING (not multiplying) the PER and WS/48 products, and worked in some modifiers such that the value of being 10% above avg in PER is worth exactly the same as being 10% above avg in WS/48, 20% above avg in PER is worth exactly the same as 20% above average in WS/48, and so on:

((PER-15)*0.033333)+((WS/48-0.1)*5)*minutes played

Obvious and most relevant flaws with this measure
1) Utilizes only PER and WS/48 as root metrics, to the complete exclusion of all other measures
2) Makes no attempt to account for strength of era
3) Largely ignores context or circumstance, role on team, etc.
4) Significantly sub-standard post-prime seasons can potentially damage or worsen the result, essentially taking away from prior accomplishment (this is particularly relevant to Tiny, for instance).
5) Using rs numbers only, it disregards playoff career.

But it was only intended as another baseline or starting point measure of career value anyway.
I ran thru all the guys who are receiving votes, serious discussion, or even suggestive name-dropping; thought I would share the results:

Neil Johnston - 18,815.73
Walt Bellamy - 17,910.13
Larry Nance - 15,912.99
Shawn Marion - 15,338.99
Chris Bosh - 14,061.75
Bobby Jones - 12,391.78
Tony Parker - 11,863.51
Carmelo Anthony - 11,437.82
Chris Webber - 11,001.94
Horace Grant - 10,362.95
Rasheed Wallace - 9,483.33
Tiny Archibald - 7,478.21
James Worthy - 7,200.55
Hal Greer - 5,702.67
Bill Walton - 4,990.46

Anyway, fwiw.....

Post #20 » by **Doctor MJ** » Sun Jan 18, 2015 10:43 pm

SinceGatlingWasARookie wrote:I think this is too soon for Bobby Jones. He had good defensive timing and an accurate mid range shot.
I remember him as something like a cross between Tayshaun Prince, David Lee and Kirilenko but with an accurate mid range shot.

I'm not sure how to respond to the "cross between" statement.

All 3 guys seem like they are being thrown out there to point to him as an underwhelming player compared to others at this level, but quite literally if we said something like: "He's like peak Kirilenko, but a much superior man defender who also scores efficiently at decent volume", to me that's a strong MVP candidate. And if you're not talking about Prince to mean "excellent man defender" I don't know what he's supposed to mean here.

Though I guess no matter what the Lee mention just weirds me. I don't see the connection.