Peaks Project #31

[trex_8063]

RealGM Greatest Player Peaks of All-Time List
1. Michael Jordan ('91---unanimous)
2. Shaquille O'Neal ('00---unanimous)
3. Lebron James ('13---non-unanimous ('09, '12))
4. Wilt Chamberlain ('67---non-unanimous ('64))
5. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar ('77---non-unanimous ('71, '72))
6. Hakeem Olajuwon ('94---non-unanimous ('93))
7. Tim Duncan ('03---non-unanimous ('02))
8. Kevin Garnett ('04---unanimous)
9. Bill Russell ('65---non-unanimous ('62, '64))
10. Magic Johnson ('87---unanimous)
11. Larry Bird ('86---non-unanimous ('87, '88))
12. David Robinson ('95---non-unanimous ('94, '96))
13. Bill Walton ('77---unanimous)
14. Julius Erving ('76---unanimous)
15. Oscar Robertson ('64---non-unanimous ('63))
16. Dwyane Wade ('09---non-unanimous ('06, '10))
17. Stephen Curry ('15---unanimous)
18. Dirk Nowitzki ('11---non-unanimous ('06, '09))
19. Jerry West ('66---non-unanimous ('68, '69))
20. Kevin Durant ('14---unanimous)
21. Patrick Ewing ('90---unanimous)
22. Tracy McGrady ('03---unanimous)
23. Kobe Bryant ('08---non-unanimous ('06, '09))
24. Charles Barkley ('90---non-unanimous ('93))
25. Moses Malone ('83---unanimous)
26. Chris Paul ('08---non-unanimous ('15))
27. Karl Malone ('97---non-unanimous ('92/'95/'98))
28. Steve Nash ('07---non-unanimous ('05))
29. Anthony Davis ('15---unanimous)
30. Dwight Howard ('11---non-unanimous ('09))
31. ????

Let it begin. I'm probably looking at Baylor, Harden, and McHale for my ballots. Would like to hear a bit of discussion about Pettit and Hawkins, though.
Likely looking at late Monday night for a closing time on this thread.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

[70sFan]

1st ballot - Bob McAdoo 1975
2nd ballot - Elgin Baylor 1961
3rd ballot - Artis Gilmore 1975/1976

I missed last ballot due to busy time. I'm glad that Nash won it, big fan of his game

I've voted for Bob and Elgin for a few rounds, so I don't need to explain this choices again. About Gilmore - here is good thread about him:
http://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=1403558
I'm not sure which year should I take. Also, it's tough choice between Howard and Gilmore. Both are great defensive players and very good on offensive end. Why I picked A-Train? First of all, I'm very subjective in this comparison But I'm trying to be fair for both players. Let's compare them:

a) rebounding
While Artis was amazing rebounder (as good in ABA as in NBA), he's clearly worse than Howard. In my opinion Howard is one of the best rebounders EVER (same tier with Moses, Russell, Wilt). Solid edge for Dwight.

b) offense
They are very close in terms of offense. Both are super-efficient. Both are bad passers and TOV-prone. Dwight draws more fouls, but Gilmore is better FT shooter. Dwight huge FTr is caused by him being poor FT shooter. Gilmore still drawed tons of fouls and he was able to hit FTs. This is big factor in my opinion. Also, with such a close comparison, I'm into basing on eye-test. Gilmore looks more dominant in my opinion. In fact, I don't think any defender could stop him when he wanted to shoot. Another thing is BBIQ - neither of them are good passers, but Artis looks smarter on the court. Both averaged over 4 tpg. but Artis rarely forced shots or played selfish (in my opinion too rarely...). So overall, I'd give the edge for Artis, but small one.

c) defense
This is hard for me to evaluate. From what I've seen, Gilmore was amazing defender in his prime. Not sure if as good as Dwight, but elite for sure. Both anchored best defences in the league (1975/1976 ABA and 2009 NBA). I just don't have enough knowledge to choose here, but I don't think either one have big edge.

When we also factor things like durability, Intangibles and other things - Gilmore is better overall (for me at least).

[E-Balla]

PGs:
1. 96 Penny
2/3/4. 99 Kidd/72 Clyde/85 IT
5. 15 Westbrook

Wings:
1. 61 Elgin Baylor
2. 97 Grant Hill
3/4. 01 VC/15 Harden
5. 09 Brandon Roy

Bigs:
1. 00 Alonzo Mourning
2/3/4. 75 Gilmore/58 Pettit/87 McHale
5. 75 Bob McAdoo

My nominations will be:
1. 96 Penny Hardaway
2. 00 Alonzo Mourning
3. 61 Elgin Baylor

[mischievous]

Wings:
1. 61 Elgin Baylor
2. 97 Grant Hill
3/4. 01 VC/15 Harden
5. 09 Brandon Roy

Why Drexler behind Roy, Grant Hill and Carter? I can see Baylor and Harden though.

[E-Balla]

Wings:
1. 61 Elgin Baylor
2. 97 Grant Hill
3/4. 01 VC/15 Harden
5. 09 Brandon Roy

Why Drexler behind Roy, Grant Hill and Carter? I can see Baylor and Harden though.

Roy is a better offensive player than Drexler in almost every way. As a passer it's close but watching Drexler I never got the feeling that he 100% made the offense tick like I used to with Roy. When Brandon Roy passed the ball 99% of the time the pass ended up at a perfect target in great position to score. The only player I can really compare his passing to is Chris Paul in terms of his punctuality (Roy also has the 2nd best assist to bad pass ratio ever outside of CP3 with a 7.7:1 in 08). His patience in the PNR was godly and it lead to the number one offense in 09.
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_CNQ4RjTXI[/youtube]

When it comes to scoring they're about even but I give Roy the edge. In 92 Clyde averaged 33.5 pp100 on 56 TS and in 09 Roy averaged 33.7 pp100 on 57.3 TS. In the playoffs Clyde averaged 26/7/7 on 55 TS which is amazing but in his career he doesn't have a series like Roy did against Houston in 09 (27/5/3 on 56 TS against the 4th ranked defense that held Kobe to 27/5/4 on 54 TS). Roy was also incredibly clutch. Roy shot 91% from the freethrow line in the clutch in 09, shot 48% from the field, and scored 42 pp 48. He was also 5/10 on shots to tie or take the lead with 24 or less seconds on the gameclock. Clyde on the other hand wasn't a choke but he wasn't known as a clutch player.

Now Clyde is better than Roy at one thing offensively IMO - offensive rebounding - and he's way better at it but Roy was way better handling the ball period.

Carter is a stranger case but it's basically Vince's scoring advantage vs Drexler's passing advantage. Carter's ability to score against great defenses as a wing with little to no help is probably only matched by people already on this list and Gervin. I think at the end of the day his superior efficiency wins the head to head comparison.

Grant of all these guys was the easiest choice. First off the Pistons that year were the 3rd slowest team EVER. His per 100 stats compared to Clyde:
Clyde 92: 33.5/8.8/9.0 on 56 TS
Hill 97: 30.9/13.0/10.5 on 56 TS

Now with Hill looking better by conventional numbers I also look into team success and supporting cast and that's where Grant beats Clyde IMO. Defensively the Blazers were way better than Detroit but so was their supporting cast. Offensively the Pistons outperformed Portland but the teams are about even on that end outside of their stars (Detroit had more shooters but Portland had guys like Buck, Porter, and Cliff who were all able to be decent to good second options in their careers).

[Quotatious]

Roy is a better offensive player than Drexler in almost every way. As a passer it's close but watching Drexler I never got the feeling that he 100% made the offense tick like I used to with Roy.

As someone who saw a ton of prime Roy, I'd like to comment - Roy was a good passer, even very good, but I don't think this description is accurate. Drexler was as elite of a playmaker/passer as it gets for a shooting guard, and he wasn't even ball-dominant. He moved off-ball a lot. I think Roy was more ball-dominant (another thing is that Roy was a better ball-handler...). Drexler did a lot of Larry Bird-like playmaking, where he made brilliant passes (not as brilliant as Larry, obviously, but similar in terms of the way he went about it - that is, it wasn't a result of ball-dominance, rather great decision making). Passing/playmaking goes to Drexler, IMO.

Roy was a bit better half-court player, but Drexler was better in transition. Roy wasn't particularly great in transition for a player of his caliber. Drexler was better off-ball, too. He also had a superior post game, both as a scorer and playmaker (he's much bigger, stronger and more physical than Roy - I mean, Roy was tough, both physically and mentally, but he wasn't a physical player, he was pretty much a finesse player).

Roy was the better shooter, pretty clearly. He was like Kobe, in the sense that he was an excellent ball-handler AND a good shooter from any spot on the court (with better 3-ball and shot selection than just about any version of Bryant, just not as physically dominant as Kobe, and not as good of a player, as a result). He was really good from mid-range (off the top of my head, he shot something like 41% from 10-16 feet + 16 feet out to the 3-pt line, and that is pretty respectable), solid finisher at rim, and a really good 3-pt shooter. A bit better FT shooter than Drexler, too. They are comparable in terms of ability to draw fouls. Scoring efficiency is about even, league-relative, too.

Offensively, I can see Roy getting the edge, but it's very close. Their styles were just totally different - Roy relied on skills, excelled in a slow-paced, half-court game, Drexler relied more on athleticism, and excelled in fast-paced, transition offense. I don't think one is inherently more valuable than the other.

I think you're a bit too generous to Roy by saying that he was a better offensive player "in almost every way" (and I'm saying that as a HUGE fan of Roy - I really like Drexler, too, but Roy would rank a bit higher on my list of favorite players, so I'm hardly biased here).

When it comes to scoring they're about even but I give Roy the edge. In 92 Clyde averaged 33.5 pp100 on 56 TS and in 09 Roy averaged 33.7 pp100 on 57.3 TS. In the playoffs Clyde averaged 26/7/7 on 55 TS which is amazing but in his career he doesn't have a series like Roy did against Houston in 09 (27/5/3 on 56 TS against the 4th ranked defense that held Kobe to 27/5/4 on 54 TS).

That's inaccurate. Drexler's 1990 NBA finals were at least as good as Roy's 2009 first round, if we are talking about series where they faced really tough defenses. Drexler faced the championship Bad Boy Pistons, played against Dumars and Rodman, and averaged 26.4, 7.8, 6.2, 1.8 on 60% TS (over 54% from the field). Roy's performance also came in a losing effort, so it's hardly a problem here (especially game 4 was really impressive, even though it came in a 2-point loss, where he had 34/8/10 on 14/19 shooting from the field).

Also, Drexler was absolutely dominant in the '92 WCSF against the Suns (8th best defense in the league that year) - 31.4, 8.2, 7.0, 1.8, 1.6 on 57% TS (over 51% from the field). Those were all very high-scoring games, but that itself shouldn't be used as an argument against him.

Roy was also incredibly clutch. Roy shot 91% from the freethrow line in the clutch in 09, shot 48% from the field, and scored 42 pp 48. He was also 5/10 on shots to tie or take the lead with 24 or less seconds on the gameclock. Clyde on the other hand wasn't a choke but he wasn't known as a clutch player.

That's true, but I think it may also be a little skewed in Roy's favor, because all we have for Drexler is reputation (unless we sit down and watch all the playoff series Drexler played in prime, which nobody will do here, I'm sure), and we actually have numbers for Roy, which is a much more of a "hard evidence".

Also, Drexler was a much better rebounder, and clearly better defensively, too. As an overall player, he's clearly ahead of Roy. He was really good in more areas, while Roy gets a slight edge on offense.

Now Clyde is better than Roy at one thing offensively IMO - offensive rebounding - and he's way better at it

Good point.

Grant of all these guys was the easiest choice. First off the Pistons that year were the 3rd slowest team EVER. His per 100 stats compared to Clyde:
Clyde 92: 33.5/8.8/9.0 on 56 TS
Hill 97: 30.9/13.0/10.5 on 56 TS

Now with Hill looking better by conventional numbers I also look into team success and supporting cast and that's where Grant beats Clyde IMO. Defensively the Blazers were way better than Detroit but so was their supporting cast. Offensively the Pistons outperformed Portland but the teams are about even on that end outside of their stars (Detroit had more shooters but Portland had guys like Buck, Porter, and Cliff who were all able to be decent to good second options in their careers).

Hill (another guy who ranks very high among my favorite players, so I certainly have no agenda against him) proved absolutely nothing in the playoffs, compared to Drexler, though. Even when played in the first round as a Piston, he wasn't particularly impressive, compared to how good he was in the regular season, while Drexler's 1992 playoff run was really, really good, and about as good as his RS.

Hill gets a slight edge for RS, but it's very close. Playoffs are not close at all.

I'm thinking '01 Ray Allen (super impressive playoff run, look it up) and '05 Manu would have a case over Clyde based on their awesome playoff runs, though (personally, I'd take Drexler over both because he was carrying a bigger load for his team, and he was superior in the RS, too, but I can see a case for Ray and Manu, their playoff runs were really special).

[trex_8063]

1st ballot: Elgin Baylor '61
To some degree the volume vs. efficiency considerations of Baylor (among others from this era) should be viewed with a bit of leniency, imo, as efficiency and "finding a good shot" just wasn't on anyone's radar in the early 1960's. Any way you slice it, though, Baylor was an excellent (if not quite elite) scorer, and underrated playmaker for the SF position, as well as a GOAT-level rebounder for his position, and likely a better defender than some other perimeter players on the table presently (e.g. Nash, Harden).

Baylor '61 rs per 100 possession estimates: 31.1 pts, 17.75 reb, 4.55 ast @ +2.91% rTS. 28.2 PER, .227 WS/48 in 42.9 mpg
Baylor '61 playoff per 100 possession estimates: 32.5 pts, 13.1 reb, 3.9 ast @ +6.89% rTS (53.83% TS, which would be a little above average even by today's standards). 28.0 PER, .248 WS/48 in 45.0 mpg

Some additional stuff about prime Baylor in general (copied from prior thread):

Spoiler:

Here's some more info regarding Baylor's impact, draw your own conclusions.....

In '58 (before Baylor), the Lakers were 19-53 (.264) with an SRS of -5.78.

In '59 they obtain rookie Elgin Baylor (and he's the only relevant transaction that occurred), and improve to 33-39 (.458) and -1.42 SRS (improvement of 14 wins and +4.36 SRS). They would also make it to the finals by first defeating a -1.36 SRS Detroit team 2-1, and then defeating the +2.89 SRS defending champ St. Louis Hawks 4-2.
wrt to how that improvement was managed......
Yeah, we always tend to think of Baylor as primarily an offensive player; but there's some to suggest he had a significant impact defensively, too. His reputation is mostly as a "decent" (but not great) defender, though I wonder if perhaps his prowess on the glass reduced a lot of easy second-chance opportunities for opponents (he was 3rd in the league in rebounds right off the bat in his rookie season).
Because in terms of rORTG, the Lakers in '58 (before Baylor) were -0.8 (ranked 6th of 8), and in rDRTG were +4.5 (8th of 8, and +2.5 to the 7th place team!). In '59, their rORTG improves to +0.6 (a jump of 1.4, up to 4th of 8); but rDRTG improves to +1.7 (a big jump of 2.8, from a distant last place to 6th of 8).
The team is 33-37 (.471) with him, 0-2 without him.


In '60, an aging Vern Mikkelsen has retired, aging Larry Foust misses some games and is playing a reduced role, too. Meanwhile the offensive primacy of the wildly inefficient (even for the era) Hot Rod Hundley increases, as well as a marginally increase in role for the even worse Slick Leonard (ridiculously bad 37.3% TS.....that's even -9% relative to league avg; similar to someone shooting 44% TS or so today; you'd have to be an elite defender to get ANY playing time at all today, and no way would you be getting 28+ mpg and be 6th on the team in FGA/g.....goes to show how efficiency just wasn't on the radar yet). And they also obtained rookie Rudy LaRusso (who would eventually become a pretty good player, but is a fairly inefficient scorer in his rookie season). They also obtained the somewhat inefficient Frank Selvy as well as an aging 6'11" Ray Felix in mid-season trades.
Anyway, their rORTG falls to -3.4 (8th of 8), though their defense continues to improve to +0.1 rDRTG (4th of 8), as they finish 25-50 (-4.14 SRS).
The team is 23-47 (.329) with him, 2-3 (.400) without him.


In '61, we have the arrival of rookie Jerry West. He's not yet the player he would become, but nonetheless is the clear 2nd-best behind Baylor. This affords them to reduce the role of Hundley and Leonard in the backcourt. rORTG improves to -1.3 (7th of 8), rDRTG continues to improve to -1.2 (4th of 8).
The team is 34-39 (.466) with him, 2-4 (.333) without him.


In '62, West is now a legit superstar, too. Slick Leonard is gone, and Hundley's role is further diminished; LaRusso continues to improve and get more efficient. Non-surprisingly, the team rORTG improves to +1.4 (3rd of 9). Critics might argue Baylor missing games contributed to this improvement in rORTG, but I'm more inclined to think it's the additive effects of a) the improvements in West and LaRusso, b) the loss of Leonard, and c) the reduced role of Hundley; especially in light of the following.......
Baylor misses 32 games, not due to injury, but rather to military service: he's only able to play if he can get a weekend pass to quickly travel to the game, play, and then come back. So he likely barely gets to practice, and yet still establishes himself among the league's elite---->Per 100 possession estimates: 33.6 pts, 16.3 reb, 4.1 ast @ +1.34% rTS in a whopping 44.4 mpg.
The team is 37-11 (.771) with him, 17-15 (.531) without him. Some of his missed games may have overlapped with West's missed games, but the thing is: West only missed 5 games total that year. And NO ONE else in their main rotation missed more than 2 games all year.
They make it to the finals and take the Russell Celtics to 7 games. Baylor averages 40.6 ppg, 17.9 rpg, and 3.7 apg in the series @ 51.0% TS (+3.1 rTS). In a close game 5 victory, Baylor logs [what I think is still an NBA finals record] 61 pts (and I believe 22 reb as well).

EDIT: I'd also add this quote from The Rivalry: Bill Russell, Wilt Chamberlain, and the Golden Age of Basketball by John Taylor....

.....Fans specifically came to see him [Baylor]. When he was on military duty and playing sporadically, they called the box office before games to ask if he would be appearing. The Lakers front office had run figures calculating Baylor’s ability to sell tickets, and they determined that in games when he did not play, the Lakers drew an average of 2,000 fewer fans. That amounted to approximately $6,000 per game, or $200,000 over the course of a season….

Going back to our agreement that impact = goodness + fit + utilization......I don't think Baylor was utilized ideally (something that I think is unfortunately true for MANY old era players). Yet there's still several indicators of substantial impact circa his peak, especially in '62.

Correctly utilized, I think Baylor would be the best SF not named Lebron or Kevin Durant today: a roughly Carmelo Anthony level of scorer but a better playmaker, a roughly neutral level defender, and possibly the GOAT rebounding SF outside of Shawn Marion (roughly equal to peak Lebron in this regard).


2nd ballot: James Harden '15
Harden's probably the best pure scorer in the league today except for a healthy Durant (better than Nash in this regard). His defense is improved to where I think we'd have to declare '15 Harden a "near-neutral" defender (which is to say: "not bad"). He's also a decent rebounder for his position, and a very good (elite???) level play-maker for his position.
One question mark I have for him: given his style of play, I don't think there's anyone who benefits more from the no hand-checking rule than James Harden. tbh, if not for that consideration, I think Harden probably should have been voted in a few places ago.


3rd ballot: Kevin McHale '87
I kinda went thru a big comparison between Howard/McHale, which I'll copy in the spoiler; it details my difficulty in deciding between the two:

Spoiler:

McHale vs. Dwight is an interesting comparison......
Offense
Peak Dwight is much more athletic and---related to that---is a superior finisher: pretty much devastating when he gets the ball <3 ft from the rim; is basically the GOAT finisher outside of prime Shaq and perhaps peak Robinson (finishing >75% from that range in '10 and '11, despite huge volume there--->like 50+% of his shot load, often going thru 2 or 3 defenders and getting And1's). Has developed a nice little short-range jump hook (with either hand), too. Draws tons of fouls (and was shooting nearly 60% from the FT-line at his peak; which is not good, but not godawful for a big either; getting a 60% ft-shooter to the line is still fairly efficient scoring).

Admittedly, that's where his offensive prowess ends. He has no jump-shot or range to speak of at all, limited repertoire of post-moves, not much of a passer, and a touch turnover prone.
Still, I don't mean to imply offensive mediocrity on his part (many of his critics attempt to do so, and it's absolutely untrue, imo). His hands, strength, explosiveness, etc, allow him to be in a GOAT-level tier when he gets the ball near the rim, and that cannot be trivialized. If taking a hack-a-Howard strategy, peak Howard's not as big a liability at the line as most versions of Shaq, Wilt, or Russell. Combined with even his limited post repertoire, this makes him a well-above average offensive player.


McHale, though, has a case for the GOAT where low-post game is concerned.
Great footwork, makes excellent use of his lower body to create space and effectively post up to receive the ball in a position to score. Has a myriad of effective moves; I especially like the quick fake followed by the up-and-under for the layup; or the fake shot low-side, fake shot high-side, then (when defend leaves the ground) he ducks back under for the easy layup. And he made these moves quickly, much quicker than you'd think he's capable of when you see him run up the court; he simply doesn't appear as though he could possibly move that fast. He has the short-range jump hooks, the fall-away jumper, was a pretty good finisher despite vastly inferior athleticism (relative to Howard); just very nice soft touch near the rim. Had range out to at least 12-14 ft. And >83% FT-shooter at his peak.
Guy was a scoring machine dropping 31.9 pts/100 possessions at 65.5% TS while playing damn near 40 mpg. Now certainly we can acknowledge that Bird's playmaking and the wealth of talent around him helped his efficiency. otoh, it also stole some primacy away from him. I could see peak McHale in other circumstances dropping 28-29 ppg (~36 per 100 poss) at maybe 61-62% TS in that time period.
And he's less turnover prone than Dwight, and a bit better passer (when he chose to do so, though he was mostly a black hole if you gave him the ball in the post......not saying that's a bad thing, fwiw, when you consider what the typical result of giving him the ball in the post was).

So offensively, I give McHale a solid edge.

Defense
McHale in ‘87 was an All-Defensive 1st Team forward, who often had to spend time guarding outside his position (on the opposing SF) to help hide Bird (though in Bird’s defense: Larry was a fantastic post defender). But that’s just one thing that helps illustrate McHale’s defensive versatility, because he was also an excellent low post defender, and he was also Boston’s primary rim protector, coming up with 2.7 blk/100 possessions.

So despite Dwight’s 3 DPOY awards (which I think marginally overstate his defensive value), I do think it’s close defensively. I probably give the small edge to Dwight, though, based him being sort of the sole anchor to his team’s defense, and the guy that they try to filter everything to.
Although in the past I’ve criticized Dwight for his lack of footwork and timing (where it relates to shot-blocking), noting for example that in ‘13 Howard was avg 3.5 blk/100 possessions with a BLK% of 4.9%; meanwhile a 36-yr-old Tim Duncan was avg 4.5 blk/100 possessions with a BLK% of 6.4%. Even though he’s (even after his back surgery) considerably more athletic than a 36-yr-old Duncan, he’s getting soundly trounced in his shot-blocking stats.
The primary reason, at least according to my observations, was that Duncan ascribed to (and executed) the fundamentals seen in shot-blockers like Russell and Dikembe, which involves keeping your arms up, moving your feet to stay close to the presumed shooter (so you’re in position to make the easier block), waiting for him to go up with the shot and then going up AFTER him to tip the ball just after it leaves his fingers…..a technique that requires attention to keeping your hands/arms up, footwork and timing; as opposed to relying on outstanding elevation.
Dwight has a habit of doing the latter: just sort of vaguely drifting in the direction of a potential shooter, then relying on his outstanding athleticism, gathering himself for a giant leap and batting at the air in region of the arcing shot (occasionally coming up with the amazing grand-standing type of block).

However, I will say something for this method: while strictly speaking it may not be as effective in actually coming up with blocks, it does allow him to CHANGE more shots (because as he’s more just playing a region, rather than a player, he can “get in on” more plays defensively). And I do see Howard change a lot of shots that he doesn’t actually get a paw on.

I’ve also previously criticized this technique of his because it potentially puts him out of position for the defensive rebound; but I think I simply need to retract this criticism, looking at Dwight defensive rebounding numbers (which are obviously hyper-elite).

So overall, I likely give Dwight the small edge defensively.

Rebounding
Here Dwight clearly has a sizable edge. Even relative to positional norms and expectations, it’s Dwight by a solid margin. I’ll point out one thing in McHale’s defense on this, however: part of what is depressing his rebounding numbers is what I’d mentioned above about him being forced to defend outside his natural position (guarding SF’s….that is: perimeter players)......this is at times putting him out of position for the defensive rebound.

Intangibles
This is sort of vague, and of lesser import. I’ll give McHale the edge here….he just seems like the better teammate, and the more professional and cerebral player.

Durability
This is the one that kinda hurts McHale. Based on all of the above, I’d give the small edge to McHale overall…...at least until faced with the reality that in his peak season, McHale’s body did break down and he played thru a serious injury (a friggin’ broken bone, iirc! Guy’s tough as nails) in the playoffs. While still good, even hobbled, he obviously wasn’t the McHale we’d seen throughout the rs.
Howard, otoh, was healthy thru both rs and playoffs at his peak. So that’s a consideration which brings the comparison roughly back to parity for me.

Honestly, I’ve gone back on forth on this comparison, and I’m still not sure who I’ll rank in front.

I did ultimately go with Howard based on health (and performance) in the playoffs, but it was really tight for me. With Howard out of the picture, I'm fairly comfortable going with McHale here. McAdoo, and perhaps Connie Hawkins are the front-runner HM's for me right now, though Reed, Frazier, and Gilmore, also look more or less like valid candidates, too (it's all so close, no?). Bob Pettit sort of floating nebulously in my consciousness, too.

[Dr Positivity]

Ballot 1 - Walt Frazier 1972

Ballot 2 - Alonzo Mourning 2000

Ballot 3 - Scottie Pippen 1994

Although someone like Harden and Baylor have the flashier stats, I am more comfortable building a title team around the great combination of offense and defense that the above 3 bring

Brandon Roy is a very good mention, one thing impressive about his stats is Portland was very slow paced. For example if you compare Roy and Frazier both teams are last in the league in pace but Knicks are at 108 possessions per 48 and Blazers are at 86.6 so it's quite a significant difference. On the other hand 1972 TS% is 4 points lower so although both Roy and Frazier are around the .57 TS% range, Frazier compared his league would be more like a .61-.62 TS% player today. I would call Roy a higher volume option but Frazier more efficient. Frazier ranked 6th in the league in TS%, 14th in PPG and 9th in APG with great rebounding and defense for a PG. Very complete season when it comes to stuff that wins games

Another player to consider at this point is Rick Barry who put up 31/6/6/3 in 1975 while having possibly the worst supporting cast ever for a champion. His efficiency is only a little above league average however and not a fan of his personality. His case is somewhat Kobe-lite I think. I would be interested to know how good a defender people think he was, excellent steal numbers but never any all-defense teams

[eminence]

1. Artis Gilmore 74-75 His defense seemed to fall off just a bit in later seasons. A step above Mourning on the boards.

2. Alonzo Mourning 99-00 Very good defensive center with a large offensive impact as well.

2. James Harden 14-15 Quite possibly the best offensive player left.

HM: Barry, Frazier, Pippen, McHale, Stockton, Roy, Hill, Manu are my next group. Barry is probably my favorite of those, but lots of chances for others to emerge.

[trex_8063]

Thru post #9 :

Elgin Baylor - 6
Alonzo Mourning - 6
Artis Gilmore - 4
James Harden - 3
Bob McAdoo - 3
Penny Hardaway - 3
Walt Frazier - 3
Kevin McHale - 1
Scottie Pippen - 1

Looking to close this thread late tonight. I do hope we get more participation than the mere five persons who've cast ballots.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

[E-Balla]

Lost my original reply (yay) but here's another.

Roy is a better offensive player than Drexler in almost every way. As a passer it's close but watching Drexler I never got the feeling that he 100% made the offense tick like I used to with Roy.

As someone who saw a ton of prime Roy, I'd like to comment - Roy was a good passer, even very good, but I don't think this description is accurate. Drexler was as elite of a playmaker/passer as it gets for a shooting guard, and he wasn't even ball-dominant. He moved off-ball a lot. I think Roy was more ball-dominant (another thing is that Roy was a better ball-handler...). Drexler did a lot of Larry Bird-like playmaking, where he made brilliant passes (not as brilliant as Larry, obviously, but similar in terms of the way he went about it - that is, it wasn't a result of ball-dominance, rather great decision making). Passing/playmaking goes to Drexler, IMO.

That's kind of interesting to me because when watching games (mostly from his playoff games) I never saw Drexler as an amazing passer. Very good of course the numbers will attest to that but IMO he wasn't much like Bird (who amazed me with some of the passes he threw at times and the looks he found under the basket). He was amazing at cutting, catching, and moving as the defense collapsed, and he was great at making that extra pass when he got the ball open but not too much jumped out at me with his passing like it did with Roy. Roy might be the best passing SG aside from Manu, McGrady, and West.

Roy was a bit better half-court player, but Drexler was better in transition. Roy wasn't particularly great in transition for a player of his caliber. Drexler was better off-ball, too. He also had a superior post game, both as a scorer and playmaker (he's much bigger, stronger and more physical than Roy - I mean, Roy was tough, both physically and mentally, but he wasn't a physical player, he was pretty much a finesse player).

I wouldn't say he was a bit better. Actually IMO it's not close as to who's the better halfcourt threat but Drexler put in work in transition and Roy wasn't good in transition without the ball and the ability to pass ahead since he was so slow.



Clyde was better off ball too and in the post. Still I think you are completely underestimating how good Roy was in isolation and off ball. He averaged 0.99 PPP in isolation in 09 (would've been in the 85th percentile with Dame last year), 0.92 PPP as a pnr ball handler (good for the 88th percentile last year with KD), 1.49 PPP off cuts (would've put him in the 93rd percentile with Tobias Harris last year), 1.01 PPP in the post (would've been the 87th percentile last year), and he was the only player to be in the top 75 percentile of every play type. I think Roy was amazing off ball and not far behind Clyde BUT he did have an issue relinquishing touches because he always felt he made the right plays. In his defense he was right to complain about giving touches up in 2010 since the offense was noticably worse with Miller replacing Blake and getting a lot of possessions to facilitate that Roy would've been given in 09.

Roy was the better shooter, pretty clearly. He was like Kobe, in the sense that he was an excellent ball-handler AND a good shooter from any spot on the court (with better 3-ball and shot selection than just about any version of Bryant, just not as physically dominant as Kobe, and not as good of a player, as a result). He was really good from mid-range (off the top of my head, he shot something like 41% from 10-16 feet + 16 feet out to the 3-pt line, and that is pretty respectable), solid finisher at rim, and a really good 3-pt shooter. A bit better FT shooter than Drexler, too. They are comparable in terms of ability to draw fouls. Scoring efficiency is about even, league-relative, too.



Offensively, I can see Roy getting the edge, but it's very close. Their styles were just totally different - Roy relied on skills, excelled in a slow-paced, half-court game, Drexler relied more on athleticism, and excelled in fast-paced, transition offense. I don't think one is inherently more valuable than the other.



I think you're a bit too generous to Roy by saying that he was a better offensive player "in almost every way" (and I'm saying that as a HUGE fan of Roy - I really like Drexler, too, but Roy would rank a bit higher on my list of favorite players, so I'm hardly biased here).

Well I wasn't speaking in specifics when I said that. I just meant the major 4 offensive factors (scoring, passing, rebounding, ball control/turnovers). When getting into more specific parts of there games there's plenty Clyde does better than Roy.

That's inaccurate. Drexler's 1990 NBA finals were at least as good as Roy's 2009 first round, if we are talking about series where they faced really tough defenses. Drexler faced the championship Bad Boy Pistons, played against Dumars and Rodman, and averaged 26.4, 7.8, 6.2, 1.8 on 60% TS (over 54% from the field). Roy's performance also came in a losing effort, so it's hardly a problem here (especially game 4 was really impressive, even though it came in a 2-point loss, where he had 34/8/10 on 14/19 shooting from the field).



Also, Drexler was absolutely dominant in the '92 WCSF against the Suns (8th best defense in the league that year) - 31.4, 8.2, 7.0, 1.8, 1.6 on 57% TS (over 51% from the field). Those were all very high-scoring games, but that itself shouldn't be used as an argument against him.

I completely forgot about the 90 Finals... One of the best performances for a Finals loser ever. I don't think the 92 WCSF was as good as Roy's Houston series but it was great and it deserves a mention.

That's true, but I think it may also be a little skewed in Roy's favor, because all we have for Drexler is reputation (unless we sit down and watch all the playoff series Drexler played in prime, which nobody will do here, I'm sure), and we actually have numbers for Roy, which is a much more of a "hard evidence".

We don't have hard evidence but you'd think he'd have a reputation if he really was clutch. I mean there's non clutch players with the reputation of being clutch but I'm struggling to think of someone without a clutch reputation that is (maybe Shaq?).

Also, Drexler was a much better rebounder, and clearly better defensively, too. As an overall player, he's clearly ahead of Roy. He was really good in more areas, while Roy gets a slight edge on offense.

I don't think he's clearly ahead of Roy though. Roy is incredibly well rounded offensively and it made him a great offensive hub. I mean he almost led a team to the 115 ORTG mark (they were at 114), had a 116.1 on court ORTG (comparable to a ton of guys already in), and his supporting cast was rookie Oden/Przybilla at C (Oden was very good offensively in that small role, Prz was terrible), LMA/Frye at PF (LMA was a very good 2nd option but not what he'd later become and Frye was pretty bad due to an injury), Outlaw/Rudy/Batum at SF (Outlaw's 3 best seasons and only 3 good seasons came with Roy on his team, Fernandez made his shots but was a finisher, and Batum was a rookie who could shoot but again wasn't creating much of anything), and Blake/Sergio at point (Blake has made a career out of being a mediocre backup point and his best 3 seasons are all next to Roy, Sergio was garbage and played his career high in minutes this year). On paper that team shouldn't have been as good as they were and those players as efficient as they were but with Roy dominating the ball they all looked way better than they did before or have since (aside from LMA and Batum who were pretty young).



Clyde was a better defender but it wasn't like Clyde was all defense good and it's not like Roy was a bad defender (Roy was below average to average as a defender. Not really good help but he was great in iso situations and didn't foul).

Hill (another guy who ranks very high among my favorite players, so I certainly have no agenda against him) proved absolutely nothing in the playoffs, compared to Drexler, though. Even when played in the first round as a Piston, he wasn't particularly impressive, compared to how good he was in the regular season, while Drexler's 1992 playoff run was really, really good, and about as good as his RS.



Hill gets a slight edge for RS, but it's very close. Playoffs are not close at all.



I'm thinking '01 Ray Allen (super impressive playoff run, look it up) and '05 Manu would have a case over Clyde based on their awesome playoff runs, though (personally, I'd take Drexler over both because he was carrying a bigger load for his team, and he was superior in the RS, too, but I can see a case for Ray and Manu, their playoff runs were really special).

Hill didn't prove anything but his performances weren't bad. The one time he played a non top 3 defense he was very efficient (63 TS and 121 ORTG against the 12th ranked Magic defense), and the other two times against Atlanta he was still pretty good all things considered (in 99 he put up 19/7/7 with a 29 PER vs Atlanta). In 97 specifically his efficiency looks bad but he averaged 26/7/5 on 49 TS against team. Jordan in the next round put up 27/10/5 on 51 TS. His postseason numbers in those 3 series are 21/7/6 (33/11/9 per 100) on 51.4 TS% with a 106 ORTG and 24.3 PER. In the regular season he averaged 21/9/7 (29/12/10 per 100) 53.9 TS with a 109 ORTG and 22.7 PER in that same period (96-99). I wouldn't say his performances were any worse statistically than his regular season performances. If you want to single out 97 specifically again I can't say his performance was bad relative to his regular season performance just not good when you take his competition into account. I wouldn't say the playoffs aren't close either because when Clyde met a strong Chicago defense (still not as strong as Atlanta was) he floundered a bit (24 ppg on 52 TS iirc).



I do think Ray in 01 is over him. Fun fact about that season is that Ray is one of 6 players to average 22/4/4 with a +15 individual ORTG (Jordan, Durant, Magic, Lebron, and Roy being the other 5). Ray is also one of 9 players to have a 119 ORTG and 20+ USG% in the same season during the 97-04 period.



I think Reggie might be over Clyde and Ray too while we are on that subject. His performance in 94 was beyond great offensively. 25/3/3 on 58 TS with a 123 ORTG when his next most efficient teammate had a 97 ORTG to take Indiana within 4 points of the Finals and 20/3/3 on 64 TS in the regular season. My biggest issue with Reggie is I don't know which year to pick. He was too consistent and his numbers really never matched his impact so they're nearly useless.

[Clyde Frazier]

~

I can't deal with your profile pic

[Quotatious]

Ballot #1 - Artis Gilmore '75
Ballot #2 - James Harden '15
Ballot #3 - Alonzo Mourning '00


Already explained my Gilmore and Harden picks in the previous thread. With my former #1 vote - Howard, already in, I had to find someone else to put on my ballot. Mourning over McHale was an extremely close decision, but watching them play, I thought that more of Alonzo's impact was impossible to capture by boxscore, than it was the case with McHale, because even though Kevin was a very good defender, Zo was one of the best of all-time, and he was able to really anchor team defense in a way that McHale couldn't. Also, even though Zo wasn't as great in the playoffs as he was in the regular season, he was still at least as good as McHale was in the '87 playoffs, and other McHale seasons don't compare very well to '00 Zo in terms of RS, so overall, I'd take Mourning.

[E-Balla]

~

I can't deal with your profile pic

White Iverson plus a foot.

[E-Balla]

~

I can't deal with your profile pic

White Iverson plus a foot.

[Clyde Frazier]

~

I can't deal with your profile pic

White Iverson plus a foot.

[tweet]https://twitter.com/SBondyNYDN/status/657198822989373440[/tweet]

[RSCD3_]

Ballot

1. Harden 15
2. Mchale 87
3. Mourning 00

1. Harden 2015

The best offensive player from a goodness Impact level.

6.00/-0.50

In 2015 he finally quit being a huge liability on defense and became a slight negative for the year. Although admittedly he slipped up a bit into his habits during the postseason, nothing close to what he has before but it has to be mentioned.

His offense though was incredible from November to May. His basically held his playoff production which from starting where it did is a great feat in and of itself.

2015 RS 37.0 PP100 on 60.5 TS% ( +7.1RelTS% ) 7.7RP100, 9.4AP100 on 2.62 AST/TOV% Ratio, 0.265 WS/48, 118/103
2015 PS 34.3 PP100 on 62.0 TS% ( +8.6RelTS% ) 7.2RP100, 9.5AP100 on 2.01 AST/TOV% Ratio*, 0.202 WS/48, 117/109


* 2.32 AST/TOV% Ratio if I subtract the last game of the playoffs.

Anyone who is a better passer than him is a worse scorer and the opposite is true in this case, he has the highest offensive peak left on here due to a tricky style of play ala nash that allows him to shift into the lane against almost any kind of defender and have crafty finishes to draw fouls and score at the rim. He also has an excellent jumper which can be used as a release valve for the offense when a set breaks down.

Not to mention his playmaking is very elite for a SG and his impact in setting up his teammates is very valuable.

He's great at setting up the corner 3, in fact he lead the league in it last year by decent magin.

2 . Mchale

I think it's time for the lengthy PF to make his appearance. He was long enough to play C in today's days and even though his build was slighter, he was wiry strong and could hold his own against most centers of today's era and a couple of those back in the day. Because they already had Parish and bird could defend quick 3's they were able toi use him to defend 3's a lot with his huge wingspan, this probably dialed his defense. He was a good rebounder for a PF and a decent one for a small ball center, an that's without taking into account the capability of bird and parrish as rebounders which led to a decrease in numbers most likely.

His RS was seriously incredible, his offense may have been a bit more like a finisher than would be optimal from an offensive anchor standpoint but he put up high volume and high efficiency and his passing wasnt that bad for his role. It wasnt as good as in 87 from a RS standpoint but his playoffs definitely make up for that, he was great in the playoffs, an underrated and probbaly forgotten fact thanks to the 88 pistons winning the ECF.

1988 Mchale

1988 RS 29.7 PP100 on 65.6 TS% ( +11.8 RelTS% ) 11.0 RP100, 3.5 AP100 on 0.93 AST/TOV% Ratio, 0.205 WS/48 126/110
1988 PS 34.3 PP100 on 67.0 TS% ( +13.2 RelTS% ) 9.9 RP100, 2.9 AP100 on 0.94 AST/TOV% Ratio, 0.220 WS/48. 129/110


3.00/2.25

2000 Mourning

A similar player to Dwight Howard , who was a very athletic finisher, a great defender around the rim and a good rebounder. That and playoff play is where I seperate them based on peak but he's still a very good player and I would call him not a poor man's dwight but a " one dollar per hour less dwight " / pardon the joke. His playoffs were a bit subpar from a scoring perspective and that holds a little bit of weight here as well.

Anyways I'll let the stats speak for themselves here because I'm a little short on time

000 RS 33.5 PP100 on 59.6 TS% ( +7.3RelTS% ) 14.7RP100, 2.4 AP100 on 0.60 AST/TOV% Ratio, 0.226 WS/48, 112/96
2000 PS 32.6 PP100 on 54.3TS% ( +1.9RelTS% ) 15.1RP100, 2.1AP100 on 0.80 AST/TOV% Ratio, 0.217 WS/48, 106/91

2.00/3.25

[MyUniBroDavis]

No time to post so I'll put a quick ballot

Baylor
Alonzo
Harden

[JordansBulls]

1. Penny Hardaway (1996) - Led the Magic to 60 wins and the best player on the squad even over Shaq that season
2. Grant Hill (1997) - Great on both ends, triple double machine and was the scorer and playmaker for the Pistons.
3. Clyde Drexler (1992) - 2nd in MVP voting led Blazers to best record in the league and averaged 25/7/7

[trex_8063]

1. Penny Hardaway (1996) - Led the Magic to 60 wins and the best player on the squad even over Shaq that season
2. Grant Hill (1997) - Great on both ends, triple double machine and was the scorer and playmaker for the Pistons.
3. Clyde Drexler (1992) - 2nd in MVP voting led Blazers to best record in the league and averaged 25/7/7

What turned you off of Dominique (he was your #1 ballot the last time you voted)? Not that I disagree with the change (I think all of your above three ballots peaked higher than Nique), but just curious.