RealGM Top 100 List #89
Moderators: Clyde Frazier, Doctor MJ, trex_8063, penbeast0, PaulieWal
RealGM Top 100 List #89
-
- Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
- Posts: 30,009
- And1: 9,695
- Joined: Aug 14, 2004
- Location: South Florida
-
RealGM Top 100 List #89
PG: Tim Hardaway, Mark Price, and maybe Mookie Blaylock are the players I'm looking at . . . should mention Penny Hardaway though he never impressed me as much as he did the TV guys of his day.
Forwards: Marques Johnson and Chris Mullin would be the main scorers; maybe Carmelo Anthony though between his season of discontent in Denver and his playoff numbers, I'd have to be persuaded. Billy Cunningham, Bob Dandridge, and Chet Walker also come to mind.
Bigs: Mel Daniels has 2 MVPs and 3 rings, albeit in a weaker league; similarly Neil Johnston has the best raw numbers in an even weaker league than Daniels. Amare Stoudamire and Jerry Lucas bring great scoring and rebounding respectively but defensive questions (Johnston is defensively questionable too); for defense, I would go with Paul Silas or Buck Williams. Bill Walton has the highest peak (though that's it for true career value -- 1 year then failed to stay healthy to the playoffs the next and 1 year as a reserve role player). Maybe Yao Ming should get a mention too.
There are a lot of other good players but as we are into the last quarter, that's my short list.
Chris Mullin v. Carmelo Anthony v. Marques Johnson; Mel Daniels v. Neil Johnston v. Yao Ming; Tim Hardaway v. Mark Price v. Mookie Blaylock; Jerry Lucas v. Billy Cunningham v. Dave DeBusschere; DeBusschere v. Paul Silas; those are the other comps I am looking at and would love feedback on.
VOTE Mel Daniels. Do I go for a good player with a long career, or a dominant player with a shorter one. If my goal is to win titles, I think I go for the best 5 year peak. In this case, that's Mel Daniels. 2 time MVP with 3 titles, rebounding titles, physical defense, that's a combination that is very portable and able to be a key component of title winning teams more easily than anyone else except Bill Walton whose run as a key championship component is just too short (1 year).
Forwards: Marques Johnson and Chris Mullin would be the main scorers; maybe Carmelo Anthony though between his season of discontent in Denver and his playoff numbers, I'd have to be persuaded. Billy Cunningham, Bob Dandridge, and Chet Walker also come to mind.
Bigs: Mel Daniels has 2 MVPs and 3 rings, albeit in a weaker league; similarly Neil Johnston has the best raw numbers in an even weaker league than Daniels. Amare Stoudamire and Jerry Lucas bring great scoring and rebounding respectively but defensive questions (Johnston is defensively questionable too); for defense, I would go with Paul Silas or Buck Williams. Bill Walton has the highest peak (though that's it for true career value -- 1 year then failed to stay healthy to the playoffs the next and 1 year as a reserve role player). Maybe Yao Ming should get a mention too.
There are a lot of other good players but as we are into the last quarter, that's my short list.
Chris Mullin v. Carmelo Anthony v. Marques Johnson; Mel Daniels v. Neil Johnston v. Yao Ming; Tim Hardaway v. Mark Price v. Mookie Blaylock; Jerry Lucas v. Billy Cunningham v. Dave DeBusschere; DeBusschere v. Paul Silas; those are the other comps I am looking at and would love feedback on.
VOTE Mel Daniels. Do I go for a good player with a long career, or a dominant player with a shorter one. If my goal is to win titles, I think I go for the best 5 year peak. In this case, that's Mel Daniels. 2 time MVP with 3 titles, rebounding titles, physical defense, that's a combination that is very portable and able to be a key component of title winning teams more easily than anyone else except Bill Walton whose run as a key championship component is just too short (1 year).
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89
-
- Banned User
- Posts: 114
- And1: 25
- Joined: Mar 08, 2015
Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89
How exactly do we justify Melo falling this low and have guys like Shawn Marion and Elton Brand ahead of him?
I understand he's not much of an all around player but still, were talking about a career 25 ppg nearly 7 rpg on 55 ts% over a fairly long career. And it isn't like he hasn't had at least some success 10 playoff trips, a Wcf appearence etc.
Easily top 80 imo.
I understand he's not much of an all around player but still, were talking about a career 25 ppg nearly 7 rpg on 55 ts% over a fairly long career. And it isn't like he hasn't had at least some success 10 playoff trips, a Wcf appearence etc.
Easily top 80 imo.
Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89
-
- Forum Mod
- Posts: 12,506
- And1: 8,141
- Joined: Feb 24, 2013
-
Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89
Vote for #89: Carmelo Anthony
I know scoring isn't the ONLY part of the game.....but it is pretty necessary. And he's a very very good scorer. In him we have a guy who once led the league in scoring while shooting 56.0% ts (+2.54% to league avg) for a team that was 2nd in the conference. Using SactoKingsFan's criteria from the last thread of >30 pts/100 @ 55+% ts (where Richmond has 5 qualifying seasons): Carmelo has 6.
If we change that criteria just slightly to >31 pts/100 @ 55.5+% ts: Carmelo has 5 qualifying seasons vs. 3 for Richmond.
If we change it to >33 pts/100 @ 56+% ts: Melo has 4 qualifying seasons vs. just 1 for Richmond.
Melo's defense is lacking, though no candidate is perfect at this point. He's a reasonably good rebounding SF, and a decent passer, too (probably better than his assist numbers by my eye-test; his turnover numbers are really pretty good considering the usage and scoring load he's shouldered). His longevity is reasonably good at this point, too. Clyde posted some relevant stuff above regarding his playoff career.
Richmond just got in......while impact data rate Richmond more favorably than it does Carmelo, I don't think we can say with any certainty that Melo ever had a supporting cast better than Richmond had in '91 (a team that went 44-38, 1.72 SRS, 2nd round exit); might be some supporting casts between '06 and '13 which were roughly "as good".
Of those eight seasons with supporting casts which were perhaps "as good", Melo's team....
*had a better rs record 7 of 8 seasons (and tied with 44 wins in the other year)
*had a higher SRS in 6 of 8 seasons
And had one season where they went deeper in the playoffs.
Boxscore metrics rate him very favorably compared to (that is: often better than) other available candidates around this stage of the project.
Impact data admittedly does not rate him overly well, though it does rate him better than individuals such as Amar'e Stoudemire, Stephon Marbury, and Joakim Noah, as well as post-1993 Joe Dumars. His best 7 years added are better than Kevin Durant's, too.
As a matter of internal consistency, too: ton of parallel between him and Dominique Wilkins, imo. I'd rate Nique a marginally better player overall, and Nique's still got a slight longevity case over him, too. But given Nique was voted in 28 places ago........would seem pretty inconsistent if Melo doesn't get in soon (seems a bit inconsistent already).
I know scoring isn't the ONLY part of the game.....but it is pretty necessary. And he's a very very good scorer. In him we have a guy who once led the league in scoring while shooting 56.0% ts (+2.54% to league avg) for a team that was 2nd in the conference. Using SactoKingsFan's criteria from the last thread of >30 pts/100 @ 55+% ts (where Richmond has 5 qualifying seasons): Carmelo has 6.
If we change that criteria just slightly to >31 pts/100 @ 55.5+% ts: Carmelo has 5 qualifying seasons vs. 3 for Richmond.
If we change it to >33 pts/100 @ 56+% ts: Melo has 4 qualifying seasons vs. just 1 for Richmond.
Melo's defense is lacking, though no candidate is perfect at this point. He's a reasonably good rebounding SF, and a decent passer, too (probably better than his assist numbers by my eye-test; his turnover numbers are really pretty good considering the usage and scoring load he's shouldered). His longevity is reasonably good at this point, too. Clyde posted some relevant stuff above regarding his playoff career.
Richmond just got in......while impact data rate Richmond more favorably than it does Carmelo, I don't think we can say with any certainty that Melo ever had a supporting cast better than Richmond had in '91 (a team that went 44-38, 1.72 SRS, 2nd round exit); might be some supporting casts between '06 and '13 which were roughly "as good".
Of those eight seasons with supporting casts which were perhaps "as good", Melo's team....
*had a better rs record 7 of 8 seasons (and tied with 44 wins in the other year)
*had a higher SRS in 6 of 8 seasons
And had one season where they went deeper in the playoffs.
Boxscore metrics rate him very favorably compared to (that is: often better than) other available candidates around this stage of the project.
Impact data admittedly does not rate him overly well, though it does rate him better than individuals such as Amar'e Stoudemire, Stephon Marbury, and Joakim Noah, as well as post-1993 Joe Dumars. His best 7 years added are better than Kevin Durant's, too.
As a matter of internal consistency, too: ton of parallel between him and Dominique Wilkins, imo. I'd rate Nique a marginally better player overall, and Nique's still got a slight longevity case over him, too. But given Nique was voted in 28 places ago........would seem pretty inconsistent if Melo doesn't get in soon (seems a bit inconsistent already).
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89
- ronnymac2
- RealGM
- Posts: 11,003
- And1: 5,070
- Joined: Apr 11, 2008
-
Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89
Vote: Carmelo Anthony
Willing to change my vote.
Since 2009, Melo has definitely been on that Dominique tier as a super volume scorer with good offensive rebounding and fairly low turnovers. In 2013 and 2014, Melo's defense was decent, too. He's got a very good peak. Like Nique, he's had some big performances in the playoffs mixed with a few duds.
Willing to change my vote.
Since 2009, Melo has definitely been on that Dominique tier as a super volume scorer with good offensive rebounding and fairly low turnovers. In 2013 and 2014, Melo's defense was decent, too. He's got a very good peak. Like Nique, he's had some big performances in the playoffs mixed with a few duds.
Pay no mind to the battles you've won
It'll take a lot more than rage and muscle
Open your heart and hands, my son
Or you'll never make it over the river
It'll take a lot more than rage and muscle
Open your heart and hands, my son
Or you'll never make it over the river
Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89
- Clyde Frazier
- Forum Mod
- Posts: 20,202
- And1: 26,065
- Joined: Sep 07, 2010
Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89
Vote for #89 - Carmelo Anthony
My argument from past threads:
Plus a few additional notes from the last thread:
My argument from past threads:
Spoiler:
Plus a few additional notes from the last thread:
Spoiler:
Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89
-
- Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
- Posts: 30,009
- And1: 9,695
- Joined: Aug 14, 2004
- Location: South Florida
-
Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89
Be the Best wrote:How exactly do we justify Melo falling this low and have guys like Shawn Marion and Elton Brand ahead of him?
I understand he's not much of an all around player but still, were talking about a career 25 ppg nearly 7 rpg on 55 ts% over a fairly long career. And it isn't like he hasn't had at least some success 10 playoff trips, a Wcf appearence etc.
Easily top 80 imo.
Because virtually any team with enough talent to have legit championship hopes would rather have guys like Shawn Marion or Elton Brand as they fit better into any role OTHER than primary scoer.
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89
-
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 5,614
- And1: 3,131
- Joined: Mar 12, 2010
Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89
trex_8063 wrote:Vote for #89: Carmelo Anthony
I know scoring isn't the ONLY part of the game.....but it is pretty necessary. And he's a very very good scorer. In him we have a guy who once led the league in scoring while shooting 56.0% ts (+2.54% to league avg) for a team that was 2nd in the conference. As noted in my above response, using SactoKingsFan's criteria of >30 pts/100 @ 55+% ts (where Richmond has 5 qualifying seasons): Carmelo has 6.
If we change that criteria just slightly to >31 pts/100 @ 55.5+% ts: Carmelo has 5 qualifying seasons vs. 3 for Richmond.
If we change it to >33 pts/100 @ 56+% ts: Melo has 4 qualifying seasons vs. just 1 for Richmond.
Melo's defense is lacking, though no candidate is perfect at this point. He's a reasonably good rebounding SF, and a decent passer, too (probably better than his assist numbers by my eye-test; his turnover numbers are really pretty good considering the usage and scoring load he's shouldered). His longevity is reasonably good at this point, too. Clyde posted some relevant stuff above regarding his playoff career.
Richmond just got in......while impact data rate Richmond more favorably than it does Carmelo, I don't think we can say with any certainty that Melo ever had a supporting cast better than Richmond had in '91 (a team that went 44-38, 1.72 SRS, 2nd round exit); might be some supporting casts between '06 and '13 which were roughly "as good".
Of those eight seasons with supporting casts which were perhaps "as good", Melo's team....
*had a better rs record 7 of 8 seasons (and tied with 44 wins in the other year)
*had a higher SRS in 6 of 8 seasons
And had one season where they went deeper in the playoffs.
Boxscore metrics rate him very favorably compared to (that is: often better than) other available candidates around this stage of the project.
Impact data, admittedly does not rate him overly well, though it does rate him better than individuals such as Amar'e Stoudemire, Stephon Marbury, and Joakim Noah, as well as post-1993 Joe Dumars. His best 7 years added are better than Kevin Durant's, too.
As a matter of internal consistency, too: ton of parallel between him and Dominique Wilkins, imo. I'd rate Nique a marginally better player overall, and Nique's still got a slight longevity case over him, too. But given Nique was voted in 28 places ago........would seem pretty inconsistent if Melo doesn't get in soon (seems a bit inconsistent already).
I wouldn't go along with the analysis on '91 as a comparison of Richmond and Melo. Richmond being in (and thus not the bar, except for internal consistency reasons but then Isiah - Gus Williams) aside ...
1) I think you're looking at "talent" (i.e. offense, especially scoring, perhaps star name value) rather than more rounded contributions and fit. The '91 Warriors bigs are a mess. Young raw, rebounding only Tyrone Hill, aging ineffective Alton Lister and then an assorted collection of stiffs (Mokeski, Jepsen, Smrek, Tolbert anyone?) or playing someone out of position. To ram this home the first "big" when the team is sorted by PER Smrek (5th, playing 25 minutes in total over the season) then Lister at 9th (7th amongst those playing more than 100 minutes) on 10.7.
In this context Billups, peak Nene, Ty Lawson, Chris Andersen, Kenyon Martin and JR Smith ('10 Nuggets) for instance seem a better cast for a scoring wing than do Mullin, Hardaway, 50 games of Marciulionis and then the rest.
2) Taking a non-peak year for Richmond and saying how many years Melo (or more specifically his teams) have better is an odd line of argumentation. Besides Richmond not being the competition and all the team factors that complicate things, a non-peak year seems an odd bar.
3) There's underlying issues with implying team impact without thoroughly assessing what is teammates. I suspect the larger hurdle than Richmond (or whomever comes next) for Melo is the manner he wasn't missed in Denver.
fwiw, from in the notes it's easier to advance through 2010's East (where Melo has peaked) than through the '91 Spurs and Lakers.
I'm fine with whomever at this point because value changes quite a lot depending on context and with the margins narrowing as we move away from the elite and of course criteria varying of course there will be different choices. I'm just saying why this isn't persuasive to me with regard to Melo.
Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89
-
- Forum Mod
- Posts: 12,506
- And1: 8,141
- Joined: Feb 24, 2013
-
Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89
Owly wrote:I wouldn't go along with the analysis on '91 as a comparison of Richmond and Melo. Richmond being in (and thus not the bar, except for internal consistency reasons but then Isiah - Gus Williams) aside ...
1) I think you're looking at "talent" (i.e. offense, especially scoring, perhaps star name value) rather than more rounded contributions and fit. The '91 Warriors bigs are a mess. Young raw, rebounding only Tyrone Hill, aging ineffective Alton Lister and then an assorted collection of stiffs (Mokeski, Jepsen, Smrek, Tolbert anyone?) or playing someone out of position. To ram this home the first "big" when the team is sorted by PER Smrek (5th, playing 25 minutes in total over the season) then Lister at 9th (7th amongst those playing more than 100 minutes) on 10.7.
In this context Billups, peak Nene, Ty Lawson, Chris Andersen, Kenyon Martin and JR Smith ('10 Nuggets) for instance seem a better cast for a scoring wing than do Mullin, Hardaway, 50 games of Marciulionis and then the rest.
2) Taking a non-peak year for Richmond and saying how many years Melo (or more specifically his teams) have better is an odd line of argumentation. Besides Richmond not being the competition and all the team factors that complicate things, a non-peak year seems an odd bar.
3) There's underlying issues with implying team impact without thoroughly assessing what is teammates. I suspect the larger hurdle than Richmond (or whomever comes next) for Melo is the manner he wasn't missed in Denver.
fwiw, from in the notes it's easier to advance through 2010's East (where Melo has peaked) than through the '91 Spurs and Lakers.
I'm fine with whomever at this point because value changes quite a lot depending on context and with the margins narrowing as we move away from the elite and of course criteria varying of course there will be different choices. I'm just saying why this isn't persuasive to me with regard to Melo.
Re: #1--->Fair enough regarding the line-up fit in GS; no question there's a bit of redundancy in some areas and gaps in others. So perhaps Melo did have some slightly better supporting casts.....and as should then be expected: he managed better team outcomes. So from this perspective I'd say at the least he did "no less" than Richmond.
Re: #2--->Not sure what the issue with taking a non-peak year is. It's not as though I was comparing it to peak Melo only; I compared it to the bulk of Melo's entire prime. And '91 can be considered a prime year for Richmond (and if not, then his prime is indeed pretty short, and that meh longevity should have worked against him in the last thread).
Re: #3--->The way Mitch wasn't missed in GS (indeed, they appear to get a bit better) is (or rather: should have been) a hurdle for Richmond, too. (i.e. if it didn't hold Richmond back in this project, it shouldn't hold Melo back)
Also, the one year Melo advanced further than any season of Richmond's prime wasn't in the 2010's East, it was in an awfully tough Western Conference ('09).
The continued comparison to Richmond is both about internal consistency (comparison to Wilkins is even more about internal consistency), but also to imply Melo is "right there" with someone (or someones) already voted in.....figuring placing him with that kind of company makes him look like a more viable candidate.
btw--Out of curiosity, where do you place Isiah Thomas all-time. Understand if you'd rather not reply here (could derail things).
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89
-
- Senior Mod
- Posts: 52,829
- And1: 21,754
- Joined: Mar 10, 2005
- Location: Cali
-
Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89
Be the Best wrote:How exactly do we justify Melo falling this low and have guys like Shawn Marion and Elton Brand ahead of him?
I understand he's not much of an all around player but still, were talking about a career 25 ppg nearly 7 rpg on 55 ts% over a fairly long career. And it isn't like he hasn't had at least some success 10 playoff trips, a Wcf appearence etc.
Easily top 80 imo.
Realistically at this stage in the game it's very difficult to have any kind of consensus. When I look at, say, the Bottom 20 of our Top 100 lists I essentially lump them all together as "guys who made it".
For me none of those guys would be on my Top 100...although I'd still have no problem with Marion or Brand ahead of Melo. Melo's failure to impact for much of his career has been frankly astonishing.
Getting ready for the RealGM 100 on the PC Board
Come join the WNBA Board if you're a fan!
Come join the WNBA Board if you're a fan!
Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89
- Quotatious
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 16,999
- And1: 11,143
- Joined: Nov 15, 2013
Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89
I'm okay with Melo getting in (actually, I would've voted for him over Mitch in the previous thread, just missed the run-off, for some reason...), but for now, I'm still going with the same guy as I did at 88.
Vote: Dave DeBusschere
Very versatile player - could score (not very efficiently - just about league average TS% in the 60s, but he had a pretty good range on his jumper - I saw him make 20-23 footers a lot of times, and even some shots from today's 3-point land), rebound (11 rebounds per game for his career as a 6'6'' or 6'7'', 220-225 lbs forward), quite possibly the best non-center defender of his era, good passer, very unselfish, smart, played with tremendous effort every game, and had some of the best "intangibles" of any player in NBA history. Excellent athlete, too (played in two pro leagues - NBA and briefly also in the MLB). Pretty good longevity - 10 year prime, and there are indications that he could've played a few more years on a high level, if he wanted to - in his last season, '73-'74, he averaged almost 18/11/4, and had probably the best scoring season of his career.
His advanced metrics are really mediocre, but he seems to be one of those guys who's impact goes beyond boxscore numbers. He was just a workhorse out there on the court, and he really reminds me of John Havlicek and especially Dave Cowens (Hondo is in since #30, Cowens since #52).
Also, how about the fact that DeBusschere became a player-coach at age 24? Speaks volumes about his basketball acumen and leadership qualities.
Let's take a look at the '68-'69 Knicks, as an example of DeBusschere's impact - before the Bellamy/DeBusschere trade, Knicks were 18-16, 52.9% W (with Bellamy), after the trade, they were 36-11, 76.6% W (with DeBusschere). Considering that New York didn't make any other changes to their roster (well, they also lost their backup point guard Howard Komives, who was traded to Detroit along with Bellamy), that's instant impact personified, right there.
Vote: Dave DeBusschere
Very versatile player - could score (not very efficiently - just about league average TS% in the 60s, but he had a pretty good range on his jumper - I saw him make 20-23 footers a lot of times, and even some shots from today's 3-point land), rebound (11 rebounds per game for his career as a 6'6'' or 6'7'', 220-225 lbs forward), quite possibly the best non-center defender of his era, good passer, very unselfish, smart, played with tremendous effort every game, and had some of the best "intangibles" of any player in NBA history. Excellent athlete, too (played in two pro leagues - NBA and briefly also in the MLB). Pretty good longevity - 10 year prime, and there are indications that he could've played a few more years on a high level, if he wanted to - in his last season, '73-'74, he averaged almost 18/11/4, and had probably the best scoring season of his career.
His advanced metrics are really mediocre, but he seems to be one of those guys who's impact goes beyond boxscore numbers. He was just a workhorse out there on the court, and he really reminds me of John Havlicek and especially Dave Cowens (Hondo is in since #30, Cowens since #52).
Also, how about the fact that DeBusschere became a player-coach at age 24? Speaks volumes about his basketball acumen and leadership qualities.
Let's take a look at the '68-'69 Knicks, as an example of DeBusschere's impact - before the Bellamy/DeBusschere trade, Knicks were 18-16, 52.9% W (with Bellamy), after the trade, they were 36-11, 76.6% W (with DeBusschere). Considering that New York didn't make any other changes to their roster (well, they also lost their backup point guard Howard Komives, who was traded to Detroit along with Bellamy), that's instant impact personified, right there.
Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89
-
- Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
- Posts: 30,009
- And1: 9,695
- Joined: Aug 14, 2004
- Location: South Florida
-
Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89
Quotatious wrote:I'm okay with Melo getting in (actually, I would've voted for him over Mitch in the previous thread, just missed the run-off, for some reason...), but for now, I'm still going with the same guy as I did at 88.
Vote: Dave DeBusschere
Very versatile player - could score (not very efficiently - just about league average TS% in the 60s, but he had a pretty good range on his jumper - I saw him make 20-23 footers a lot of times, and even some shots from today's 3-point land), rebound (11 rebounds per game for his career as a 6'6'' or 6'7'', 220-225 lbs forward), quite possibly the best non-center defender of his era, good passer, very unselfish, smart, played with tremendous effort every game, and had some of the best "intangibles" of any player in NBA history. Excellent athlete, too (played in two pro leagues - NBA and briefly also in the MLB). Pretty good longevity - 10 year prime, and there are indications that he could've played a few more years on a high level, if he wanted to - in his last season, '73-'74, he averaged almost 18/11/4, and had probably the best scoring season of his career.
His advanced metrics are really mediocre, but he seems to be one of those guys who's impact goes beyond boxscore numbers. He was just a workhorse out there on the court, and he really reminds me of John Havlicek and especially Dave Cowens (Hondo is in since #30, Cowens since #52).
Also, how about the fact that DeBusschere became a player-coach at age 24? Speaks volumes about his basketball acumen and leadership qualities.
Let's take a look at the '68-'69 Knicks, as an example of DeBusschere's impact - before the Bellamy/DeBusschere trade, Knicks were 18-16, 52.9% W (with Bellamy), after the trade, they were 36-11, 76.6% W (with DeBusschere). Considering that New York didn't make any other changes to their roster (well, they also lost their backup point guard Howard Komives, who was traded to Detroit along with Bellamy), that's instant impact personified, right there.
Why DeBusschere over Silas? Silas seemed to have the same sort of impact . . . in Boston, then in Seattle. He was a bit less of a scorer, a bit more of a rebounder, a bit better as a passer, and better at the main defensive demand put on them which was post defense though DeBusschere was better out on the floor. Silas also had more of a leadership rep.
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89
- Quotatious
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 16,999
- And1: 11,143
- Joined: Nov 15, 2013
Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89
penbeast0 wrote:Why DeBusschere over Silas? Silas seemed to have the same sort of impact . . . in Boston, then in Seattle. He was a bit less of a scorer, a bit more of a rebounder, a bit better as a passer, and better at the main defensive demand put on them which was post defense though DeBusschere was better out on the floor. Silas also had more of a leadership rep.
Honestly, I didn't even look at Silas up close, but it's a good mention. Still, I think that DeBusschere was more capable and versatile offensively, more of a star (FWIW, 8 All-Star appearances to just 2 for Silas), more versatile defensively (he could guard basically every position - one of the most versatile man defenders in NBA history), and just has better numbers across the board.
I'd probably take Buck Williams and Otis Thorpe over Silas, too.
Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89
-
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 4,531
- And1: 3,754
- Joined: Jan 27, 2013
Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89
Does Dennis Johnnson have a case for one of these last 12 spots?
EDIT: Typo.
EDIT: Typo.
Now that's the difference between first and last place.
Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89
- Quotatious
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 16,999
- And1: 11,143
- Joined: Nov 15, 2013
Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89
fpliii wrote:Does Dennis Johnnson have case for one of these last 12 spots?
I'm pretty sure he does. Ironman, pretty good longevity, played on strong teams his entire career (only one team he played on had a losing record - that's the '77 Sonics, who finished 40-42, so they weren't really bad, and DJ played less than 21 minutes per game that year), excellent defender (his reputation is terrific - I mean, he's widely considered one of the best perimeter defenders of all-time), lots of accolades (not that I really care, but it shows that he was held in high regard during his career), solid all-around player...The thing is, nothing about his numbers really stands out - he's mediocre statistically (both raw and advanced) compared to most of the other candidates right now (to be fair, though, I'm voting for DeBusschere, who isn't exactly a world beater in this regard, but like DJ, he's more of an "intangibles" guy).
We don't have impact stats (on/off or RAPM) for his career, and he rarely missed games, so it's hard to compare how his team played with and without him.
Anyway, considering that Maurice Cheeks went in at 83, and Johnson doesn't seem to be that much worse, I think he has a good shot to make the top 100 (but probably just between 95 and 100, as nobody seems to have him on their shortlist of candidates at the moment). Cheeks was a much more efficient scorer (although his volume was generally lower), and his boxscore looks a bit more impressive than DJ's. Both are terrific defenders.
Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89
-
- Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
- Posts: 30,009
- And1: 9,695
- Joined: Aug 14, 2004
- Location: South Florida
-
Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89
That and Cheeks was a true playmaker; DJ was not which is one of the main reasons Cheeks is going in. DJ was really more of a 2 than a PG.
How does DJ compare offensively to roughly equivalent defenders like Bob Dandridge or Mookie Blaylock (Blaylock was probably better at defending quick PGs but not nearly as versatile)? Or even to his former teammates Gus Williams and Jack Sikma, both of whom I valued more than DJ on that Sonics title team.
Again, a lot of players (probably another hundred) with at least some argument for the top 100 spot.
How does DJ compare offensively to roughly equivalent defenders like Bob Dandridge or Mookie Blaylock (Blaylock was probably better at defending quick PGs but not nearly as versatile)? Or even to his former teammates Gus Williams and Jack Sikma, both of whom I valued more than DJ on that Sonics title team.
Again, a lot of players (probably another hundred) with at least some argument for the top 100 spot.
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89
-
- Forum Mod
- Posts: 12,506
- And1: 8,141
- Joined: Feb 24, 2013
-
Re: RealGM Top 100 List #89
Thru post #15, and by my count we are less than 2 hrs from the 48-hour mark (from when the sudden death for #88 ended):
Mel Daniels (1) - penbeast0
Carmelo Anthony (3) - trex_8063, ronnymac2, Clyde Frazier
Dave DeBusschere (1) - Quotatious
Mel Daniels (1) - penbeast0
Carmelo Anthony (3) - trex_8063, ronnymac2, Clyde Frazier
Dave DeBusschere (1) - Quotatious
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
- SactoKingsFan
- Assistant Coach
- Posts: 4,236
- And1: 2,760
- Joined: Mar 15, 2014
-
I guess I'll go ahead and vote for my top candidate.
Vote: Shawn Kemp
Kemp had questionable BBIQ and maturity issues, but he still had an explosive offensive game during his prime due to exceptional athleticism and quickness, was a good/very good defender, excellent rebounder from 92-96 (pretty good after 96) and decent shot blocker for a big. Had some great playoff runs in SEA.
6x All-Star
3x All-NBA 2nd Team
3x top 10 MVP
Prime Kemp (92-99):
Per 100: 28.7 PTS, 16.3 REB, 3.3, AST, 4.6 STL +BLK, 110 ORtg, 99 DRtg
21.2 PER, .577 TS%, .557 FTr, 18.8 TRB%, 10.9 AST%, 3.4 BLK%, 2.2 STL%, 72.4 WS, .180 WS/48
Vote: Shawn Kemp
Kemp had questionable BBIQ and maturity issues, but he still had an explosive offensive game during his prime due to exceptional athleticism and quickness, was a good/very good defender, excellent rebounder from 92-96 (pretty good after 96) and decent shot blocker for a big. Had some great playoff runs in SEA.
6x All-Star
3x All-NBA 2nd Team
3x top 10 MVP
Prime Kemp (92-99):
Per 100: 28.7 PTS, 16.3 REB, 3.3, AST, 4.6 STL +BLK, 110 ORtg, 99 DRtg
21.2 PER, .577 TS%, .557 FTr, 18.8 TRB%, 10.9 AST%, 3.4 BLK%, 2.2 STL%, 72.4 WS, .180 WS/48
Re:
- Clyde Frazier
- Forum Mod
- Posts: 20,202
- And1: 26,065
- Joined: Sep 07, 2010
Re:
SactoKingsFan wrote:I guess I'll go ahead and vote for my top candidate.
Vote: Shawn Kemp
Kemp had questionable BBIQ and maturity issues, but he still had an explosive offensive game during his prime due to exceptional athleticism and quickness, was a good/very good defender, excellent rebounder from 92-96 (pretty good after 96) and decent shot blocker. Had some great playoff runs in SEA.
6x All-Star
3x All-NBA 2nd Team
3x top 10 MVP
Prime Kemp (92-99):
Per 100: 28.7 PTS, 16.3 REB, 3.3, AST, 4.6 STL +BLK, 110 ORtg, 99 DRtg
21.2 PER, .577 TS%, .557 FTr, 18.8 TRB%, 10.9 AST%, 72.4 WS, .180 WS/48
Actual #s from 92-99:
18.3 PPG, 10.4 RPG, 2.1 APG, 1.4 SPG, 1.5 BPG, 3.2 TOPG
I was a huge fan of kemp back then, and those are certainly 8 solid seasons, but i think the fact that he fell off a cliff at 30 years old hurts him here. He simply became unreliable due to his weight gain and drug / alcohol abuse. He was a little too TO prone, too averaging more TOs than assists along with a TO% of 16.9% (and 17.4% in the playoffs) during that span. Carmelo from 06-14 is only at 10.9% (and actually drops to 9.9% in the playoffs). A PF like webber who handled the ball a lot was only at 12.1% from 96-05. Current PFs like aldridge and blake hover around 8-12%. I think this is a concern for kemp.
Re: Re: Re:
- SactoKingsFan
- Assistant Coach
- Posts: 4,236
- And1: 2,760
- Joined: Mar 15, 2014
-
Re: Re: Re:
Clyde Frazier wrote:SactoKingsFan wrote:I guess I'll go ahead and vote for my top candidate.
Vote: Shawn Kemp
Kemp had questionable BBIQ and maturity issues, but he still had an explosive offensive game during his prime due to exceptional athleticism and quickness, was a good/very good defender, excellent rebounder from 92-96 (pretty good after 96) and decent shot blocker. Had some great playoff runs in SEA.
6x All-Star
3x All-NBA 2nd Team
3x top 10 MVP
Prime Kemp (92-99):
Per 100: 28.7 PTS, 16.3 REB, 3.3, AST, 4.6 STL +BLK, 110 ORtg, 99 DRtg
21.2 PER, .577 TS%, .557 FTr, 18.8 TRB%, 10.9 AST%, 72.4 WS, .180 WS/48
Actual #s from 92-99:
18.3 PPG, 10.4 RPG, 2.1 APG, 1.4 SPG, 1.5 BPG, 3.2 TOPG
I was a huge fan of kemp back then, and those are certainly 8 solid seasons, but i think the fact that he fell off a cliff at 30 years old hurts him here. He simply became unreliable due to his weight gain and drug / alcohol abuse. He was a little too TO prone, too averaging more TOs than assists along with a TO% of 16.9% (and 17.4% in the playoffs) during that span. Carmelo from 06-14 is only at 10.9% (and actually drops to 9.9% in the playoffs). A PF like webber who handled the ball a lot was only at 12.1% from 96-05. Current PFs like aldridge and blake hover around 8-12%. I think this is a concern for kemp.
Yeah, I added per 100 before you responded to the post. His prime would be quite a bit more impressive if those were per game stats. Kemp's turnover problem is a concern, but I think he more than made up for it with his scoring, rebounding and defense. When it comes to the quality of his post prime seasons, I don't think it's that big of a deal. Still had an impressive 8 year prime, was a good prime playoff performer and had decent longevity even if you throw out his post prime seasons.
Re:
-
- Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
- Posts: 30,009
- And1: 9,695
- Joined: Aug 14, 2004
- Location: South Florida
-
Re:
SactoKingsFan wrote:I guess I'll go ahead and vote for my top candidate.
Vote: Shawn Kemp
Kemp had questionable BBIQ and maturity issues, but he still had an explosive offensive game during his prime due to exceptional athleticism and quickness, was a good/very good defender, excellent rebounder from 92-96 (pretty good after 96) and decent shot blocker for a big. Had some great playoff runs in SEA.
6x All-Star
3x All-NBA 2nd Team
3x top 10 MVP
Prime Kemp (92-99):
Per 100: 28.7 PTS, 16.3 REB, 3.3, AST, 4.6 STL +BLK, 110 ORtg, 99 DRtg
21.2 PER, .577 TS%, .557 FTr, 18.8 TRB%, 10.9 AST%, 3.4 BLK%, 2.2 STL%, 72.4 WS, .180 WS/48
Kemp v. Mel Daniels
Scoring -- both primarily inside scorers. Kemp the superior athlete and finisher on the break, Daniels the more reliable post game where Kemp just tried to jump over everyone. Scoring average per 36 is almost identical, Daniels has the minutes advantage, Kemp the pace advantage. Kemp is a better FT shooter and draws more FT giving him a significant efficiency advantage as well and that advantage gets even stronger in the playoffs. Neither really good enough to be suited to the role of first option on a contender.
Rebounding -- Daniels is the better rebounder, total/per 36/per 100 poss/rebound rate. Although not the leaper that Kemp was, Daniels was much superior at the rebounding skills of boxing out and anticipating where the ball would come off.
Playmaking -- both finishers, neither passed particularly well though Kemp thought of himself as more of a playmaker and had a higher assist rate, he also had a higher turnover rate and a worse assist/turnover ratio.
Defense -- Again, Kemp far more athletic, Daniels more positional. Daniels was better at keeping post scorers off their sweet spots, Kemp at gambling for steals and slightly superior at shot blocking as well. Kemp didn't always make good decisions in the passing lanes either creating more easy buckets for his opponents.
Durability -- Clear advantage Kemp; Daniels had a shorter prime and far less time as a role player though not sure whether you really wanted Kemp on your team post prime.
Intangibles -- Clear advantage Daniels; Kemp was a foul prone immature jerk, Daniels was more of an intimidator who liked to throw his weight around but was well liked by his teammates and is still popular in Indiana.
If you wanted to live with his immaturity, Kemp had a higher ceiling though 2 MVPs implies that Daniels was still a pretty high ceiling player. If you wanted consistency and effort, Daniels should be your preferred choice. If I want to win a ring, I go with Daniels pretty easily for most teams.
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.