RealGM Top 100 List #63

[penbeast0]

Criteria: Take into account both peak and career play, era dominance, impact on the game of basketball, and how well their style of play and skills would transcend onto different eras. To be more exact, how great they were at playing the game of basketball.

Voting Will End In 2 Days -- Please vote and nominate

Newest addition:

Dikembe Mutombo Mpolondo Mukamba Jean-Jacques Wamutombo

1x All-NBA 2nd Team
2x All-NBA 3rd Team
4x Defensive Player of the Year
4x All-Defense 1st Team
3x All-Defense 2nd Team
8x All-Star

Vince Carter

1x All-NBA 2nd team
1x All-NBA 3rd team
8x All-Star
Rookie of Year

Nate Thurmond

Hall of Fame 1985
2x All-Def 1st Team
3x All-Def 2nd Team

Penny Hardaway

2x 1st team All-NBA
1x 3rd team All-NBA
4x All-Star

Robert Parish

Hall of Fame 2003
1x 2nd team All-NBA
1x 3rd team All-NBA
4x NBA Champion (once as deep bench with Bulls)
9x All-Star


Bernard King

2x All-NBA 1st team
1x All-NBA 2nd team
1x All-NBA 3rd team
4x All-Star


Dennis Rodman

2x All-NBA 3rd Team
5x NBA Champion
2x Defensive Player of the Year
7x All-Defense 1st Team
1x All-Defense 2nd Team
2x All-Star


Grant Hill

1x 1st Team All-NBA
3x 2nd Team All-NBA
7x All-Star
Rookie of the Year

[penbeast0]

On the wings we have Grant, Bernard, Penny, and Vince . . . of them, Bernard King was the most dominant, Grant Hill the most well rounded, and Vince had the longest career. If anyone wants to put together a good comp, I might change my mind but right now I rank them:
1 GHill
2 BKing
3 VCarter
4 AHardaway

For the bigs, Parish has the consistency, Rodman the rings, and Thurmond the best defense; I'm not a fan but I really think the Worm has the best chance of helping a team win it all though all 4 are valuable
1 Rodman
2 Parish
3 Thurmond
4 Mutombo

I loved Grant Hill and disliked Dennis Rodman and I agree that a team with Rodman as its star isn't going anywhere BUT . . . Rodman as a supercomplementary piece was a part of 8 championships and obnoxious as he was, that isn't an accident. VOTE: Dennis Rodman

[penbeast0]

Point Guards -- I like Billups's consistency and efficiency, not up for any of the others
Chauncey Billups
Nate Archibald
Tim Hardaway
Mark Price
Dennis Johnson ? Mookie Blaylock?

Shooting Guards -- Not really feeling any of the top guys yet but here's who I'm thinking about
David Thompson
Joe Dumars
Bill Sharman ?
Chris Mullin
Hal Greer

Shooting Forward -- a top of great candidate left, in no particular order
Adrian Dantley
Billy Cunningham
James Worthy
Shawn Marion
Connie Hawkins

Power Forward -- I really can't see Shawn Kemp with all the outstanding forwards left, he was immature, foul prone, had a low basketball IQ and really wasn't that dominant. Heck, I'd think long and hard about bangers like Paul Silas or Buck Williams before Kemp. Schayes had all sorts of awards but like Cousy, I just don't see the numbers standing up although he was the greatest free throw shooting big ever -- better than Dirk or Bird even. Elton Brand was injured several times and was more a big numbers on weak teams guy but I'd consider him -- but I'd still rather have a consistent two way presence like Bobby Jones, Larry Nance, or Shawn Marion:

Bobby Jones
Jerry Lucas
Larry Nance
Amare Stoudamire
Terry Cummings

Centers: starting to run a little short here
Dikembe Mutombo
Mel Daniels
----------?
Walt Bellamy
Neil Johnston
Yao Ming

NOMINATE BOBBY JONES
-- arguably the most consistent and versatile defender outside of the dominant centers ever . . . 10 1st team All-Defense in his first 10 years is unmatched by anyone, ever and an efficient and heady offensive player with great intangibles.

After that . . .
2. Chauncey Billups?
3. OPEN TO ARGUMENTS

[penbeast0]

From Lists:

Vote:
Bernard King -- ronnymac2

Nominate:
Dolph Schayes -- Fencer
Billy Cunningham -- ronnymac2

[JordansBulls]

Vote: Penny Hardaway
Nominate: Shawn Kemp

[therealbig3]

Vote: King

Doctor MJ, you asked before why Nance over Price. I think Price was a poor man's John Stockton, in the sense that he could rack up the assists, and he could shoot, but he wouldn't/couldn't take over games with his scoring (ie, what separates Nash from Stockton, really). A very good player though, and he's coming up for me as well.

But I don't know about Nance anymore...I'm pretty confused at this point to be honest, because there are a ton of guys I can see get nominated at this point. So I'll abstain until I hear a convincing enough argument for someone.

[FJS]

Vote: Bernard King
Nomination: James Worthy

Reasons: See in #62

[Doctor MJ]

Posted this late last time:

Nominate: Billy Cunningham

Cunningham's slipped quite a bit this go around from the previous two lists, and I'm not going to say that's wrong. However, as I look for my next nominee, he's the one I keep coming back to. For those not familiar with him, here's some quick hits:

Became the star of the 76ers after Wilt left as the team continued to perform shockingly well.
Switched over to the ABA, and won MVP as the team skyrocketed in performance.
Known as an extremely high BBIQ guy with a constant motor. This was a 6'6" capable of leading his team in basically all categories. In his MVP year, and granted this was the mid-ABA, he led his team in points, rebounds, assists, and steals as they won 57 games.

Understand also that he played for Dean Smith and Larry Brown before almost immediately after his retirement being handed the reigns of Philly as coach, and he had great success coaching during which he was particularly noted for crafting some fantastic defenses. So this was your point forward on offense who lit up the boards, and understood defense very well.

On the negative side, you with he'd not had that career ending injury. It would also be nice if he were a more efficient scorer. The same criticisms I level at Webber on this front could be leveled at Cunningham, but I'm much more convinced that Cunningham was a guy who would adapt to his team's needs.

[Doctor MJ]

Vote: King

Doctor MJ, you asked before why Nance over Price. I think Price was a poor man's John Stockton, in the sense that he could rack up the assists, and he could shoot, but he wouldn't/couldn't take over games with his scoring (ie, what separates Nash from Stockton, really). A very good player though, and he's coming up for me as well.

But I don't know about Nance anymore...I'm pretty confused at this point to be honest, because there are a ton of guys I can see get nominated at this point. So I'll abstain until I hear a convincing enough argument for someone.

Fair post. Now something I will say, according to b-r, Price had 21 regular season games where he scored 30 or more points, and because of his short prime, I believe 20 of those happened over 6 years.

Nash has 38, and of course is far more accomplished in the playoffs, so that's more but over a bit longer time period, but Stockton had 11 in his entire career. So in terms of "take over" track record, Price is still well north of Stockton.

[Doctor MJ]

Going to hold off with my induction vote for now, but leaning toward King.

[Dr Positivity]

Grouping players together since that seemed to sort things out for me before:

Defensive big men:
Thurmond
Mutumbo
Rodman (close enough)

The first question I have is asking whether Rodman has the defensive impact these guys have. High as it is, I'm not sure he can do what a C does. With that said Rodman can play beside a C who will on the average give you greater defensive impact capability than a SF or PF Thurmond/Mutumbo are playing with and rebounding is part of defense - But overall I lean Thurmond and Mutumbo there. As do I on offense. Thurmond seems like the best offensive player of the 3, not only does he score at a reasonable rate but a big man with a jumpshot has its own value by spacing the paint area. Dikembe I have as better than Rodman offensively, not only are his scoring stats a little better, but generally at SF and PFs are going to be better offensively than Cs, so the "VORP" of Mutumbo's offense vs Cs is not as poor as Rodman's if that makes sense. On top of all this Rodman has attitude issues and had some points where he neglected do to chase rebounds

Thurmond vs Mutumbo - As mentioned in the previous paragraph, I feel Thurmond is the better offensive player due to his jumpshot and overall improved scoring volume. Defensively, the impression I've usually had is Mutumbo was the better help defender and Thurmond a GOAT man defender. But Thurmond being a top 5-6 shotblocker when they start tracking them in 74, when he's past his prime indicates to me he was excellent in that area too - and his defensive +/- numbers posted are also supportive of that value. Also, if you're going to be a GOAT man defender at C, in the golden age of Cs that's extremely valuable. So I will let the offensive difference dictate the vote - Thurmond over Mutumbo

All around perimeter players
Hill
Carter
Penny

Hill vs Penny. In their primes it's a draw to me, slight edge to Hill because I feel he had more defensive impact and he was a better leader. On top of that Hill has 4 year prime vs Penny's 3 (not counting Hill's 00) which is enough for me to say Hill (I prefer Hill's post injury contributions to Penny's as well though I could see the argument for Penny's)

Carter vs Hill - Hill has the better prime but Carter has the longevity. Carter's star years are 00, 01 and 05, 06, 07 where he's at that 25/6/5 level and basically as good as a prime Paul Pierce, and he's a solid all around wing who's kind of a bitch in 04, 08, 09. (02 and 03 are useless injury years). Are Hill's 4 best years good enough to bridge the gap to like 8 valuable years. Eh... I'm going to have to say no.

Parish vs Thurmond - Tough one due to offense vs defense and peak for Thurmond (seemingly higher) vs longevity for Parish questions come into play. I believe Parish proved you could build a good defense with him at C, so with his offensive advantages, gun to my head I would draft Parish and know I'm set on both ends at the position and I have the longevity

Carter vs King - King's all-star caliber years appear to be 81, 82, 83 and then the huge 84 year. Carter has those 5 great years as I mentioned. But King appears to have the "I have some questions but I'm still get a prominent 20ppg" guy years that Carter's secondary years are. Both have intangible questions, I would take selfish aggression over being soft so I lean King there. Overall I think 84 is enough to make the difference since title caliber #1s are that rare

Parish vs King - I have nowhere to start on this comparison other than asking the draft question, which I would go King. In this case anyways nobody's voting Parish so it makes sense to just vote King

Vote Bernard King

Nominate Carmelo Anthony

[rocopc]

Sorry... but... I just dont understand why vote on Melo but just forget about Tiny Archibald, Dolph Schayes and even James Worthy... and I know that is just awfull that other people all the time pick around in yours selections but... it .... maybe you see something that I just dont..

And the list (players that I pick before Melo) its not short (3 before mentioned plus Larry Nance, Shawn Kemp, Tim Hardaway, Bill Sharman, Billy Cunningham, Earl Monroe, Adrian Dantley, Chris Mullis and Dennis Johnson)

Sorry for my english its no to good.

[Dr Positivity]

I believe Melo has the capability to be the #1 option on a good/great/contending team while most of the players left are best suited as supporting players

I don't have a problem with the arguments against Melo. Some people clearly put a lot of trust into something like APM. OTOH Carmelo having the impact he was supposed to as a top 10-15 player in Denver stands out pretty clear to me based on the other pieces on the team

[penbeast0]

From end of prior thread . . .

Price never impressed at the defensive end or dominated -- he could put up big games in scoring but they were just games where he had a hot hand, not ones where you could count on him as a go to guy if that makes sense; Daugherty is another guy who never seem to physically dominate his opponent and who was a below average defender plus Daugherty's career was quite short (very good passer though in addition to solid scorer). Nance is the guy who played great two way ball; his only real issue is his lack of handles (much like Marion) and his inability to hold position in the post against strong players. His unusual strength is his mobility which is why he's one of the 10 greatest shotblockers in NBA history and the only non-center on the list -- also the NBA's 1st slam dunk champion -- over Erving among others.

As for Brand being a better defender than Marion -- Brand was a better defender in the post than Marion but Marion was a considerably more disruptive force when able to play his proper position out on the wing than Brand was playing his proper position in the post. Marion's great mobility and athleticism also made him better against active wings (the Dirk/Webbertype). Both were good man defenders, Marion was a much more disruptive help defender. I'd be willing to say Marion defended 4/5's a helluva lot better than Brand defended 3/2's but since Brand was rarely if ever forced into that role, who cares.

As for Bobby Jones, I wouldn't call him an anchor although he did anchor those Denver teams under Larry Brown -- in the sense that he was the only really good defender on a very good defensive team that played a jump and switch defense relying on athleticism and trapping -- something he was one of the best bigs ever to do. And he was a terrific man defender with very good help skills too; topping out with 2bl/2st seasons and 10 1st team all-defense awards in his 1st 10 seasons, something no one else has ever done which shows the esteem he was held in by those watching him then. As for his offense, he was an opportunistic jump shooter who ran a very good back door; not a guy who could create offense but a guy who was in constant motion and feasted on open looks and running his defender into traffic to get free on cuts. Great offense? No, he didn't have the Reggie Miller range or the Havlicek handles to be a 20-25ppg guy -- but great efficiency and a great cog who always kept the ball moving and played offense with a very high IQ as he did defense. Not an anchor but maybe the best complementary player ever (Rodman may be his best competition for this) -- or as Larry Brown called him, "Superglue."

[Sasaki]

I'll admit I haven't paid too much attention at this point..... but I'm seeing people sincerely make the argument that Melo is worse than Marion and Brand?" I just don't see it. Heck, I really don't see how Carter has had that much better a career than Melo.

[Laimbeer]

Vote -Thurmond
Nominate-Schayes

[Doctor MJ]

I'll admit I haven't paid too much attention at this point..... but I'm seeing people sincerely make the argument that Melo is worse than Marion and Brand?" I just don't see it. Heck, I really don't see how Carter has had that much better a career than Melo.

Well, appreciate you didn't come in with an attitude about it.

I guess I'd start off by saying, why are you so dismissive of someone like Brand? I mean, a 20/10 guy who plays solid big man defense and was as a stand up leader. I mean, that's essentially the definition of the ideal player most teams would like to build around - granted that Brand is on the lower end of that spectrum, but how many guys do that?

In recent years, that's basically:

KG, Duncan, Shaq, Howard, Yao, Brand

Nix Yao from the list because he was injured all the time, and you've got 4 guys who will probably be considered Top 20 all-time players and Brand. Guys like Brand, not that easy to come by.

I simply don't value a guy like Melo who scores at volume with middling efficiency without real playmaking or defense or indications of strong intangibles that much.

[lorak]

I think it's time for Schayes - he was doing extremely well during RPOY project (#23 in award shares!). So he's my nomination. Clif Hagan also should be nominated soon (# 45).

BTW, if Gasol is already on the list what do you all think about Divac and Schrempf?

[drza]

I think it's time for me to vote Rodman. I actually nominated him before Ginobili and Gasol, both of whom I've now voted for before him, and I gave pretty copious reasoning for Rodman during the nomination trials since he was on the ballots for quite awhile.

As far as nominations, I nom'ed Webber last thread and he's still my default, though I could get behind a Schayes push and it seems like he's got a bit of momentum. So I'll go Schayes now, though that could be subject to change.

Vote: Dennis Rodman
Nominated: Dolph Schayes

[Doctor MJ]

I think it's time for Schayes - he was doing extremely well during RPOY project (#23 in award shares!). So he's my nomination. Clif Hagan also should be nominated soon (# 45).

BTW, if Gasol is already on the list what do you all think about Divac and Schrempf?

-Hagan's an interesting case I'll have to think more about. I'm traditionally slotted him below Sharman, but my mind is open.

-Divac & Schrempf? You mean just because they're all Euros?

Well, I have a real hard time thinking of Divac as a real star. He's that kind of guy who is Top 10 at his position who can slide into an all-star spot if everything breaks the right way, but when it happens you just feel sad because you know there SHOULD have been more deserving candidates.

Schrempf is a guy have a very hard time getting a handle on. I dont consider him to be in a real debate with Gasol...but I'd have a hard time arguing vehemently for him or anywhere at any particular spot because I can see good counter-aguments for anything that gets brought forward.