RealGM Top 100 List #96

[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

NOTE: LISTS WITHOUT DISCUSSION WILL NOT BE COUNTED IN THE FINALS VOTE

Shawn Marion

2x All-NBA 3rd
NBA Champion 2011
4x All-Star

Mitch Richmond

3x 2nd Team All-NBA
2x 3rd Team All-NBA
2002 NBA Title (Lakers)
1989 Rookie of the Year
6x All-Star


Chris Mullin

1x All-NBA 1st
2x All-NBA 2nd
1x All-NBA 3rd
5x All-Star

Dave DeBusschere

Hall of Fame 1983
1x All-NBA 2nd Team
2x NBA Champion
6x All-Defense 1st Team
8x All-Star

Bill Laimbeer

2x NBA Champion
4x All-Star


Brad Daugherty

1x NBA 3rd Team
5x All-Star

[penbeast0]

Shawn Marion is probably my choice here.

Compare to:

Daugherty -- Marion scores as well; nearly as efficiency, rebounds as well despite playing 3/4 instead of 5, and plays much better defense both man and help; Daugherty is a better passer and a guy you can run an offense through but that doesn't make up for his mediocre defensive skills in this comparisom.

Laimbeer -- is the opposite. Nasty man defender but that's his only arguable advantage over Marion. Marion scores more, has better range, is a better help defender, has a longer peak, and was generally a more dominant player.

DeBusschere -- similar to Laimbeer. Another great defender but as DeBusschere has some signature defense on Wilt in the finals, so Marion put a hurt on LeBron in last year's final to the point where people question LeBron's heart now (as they do Wilt's). Marion is clearly the better scorer bin terms of volume, efficiency, range, everything ... and at least DeBusschere's equal as a rebounder.

Mullin/Richmond -- two more very similar players. Both are superior scorers to Marion, Mullin more efficient while Richmond wasn't. Marion, though, brings great defense and rebounding to a team; Richmond was solid, Mullin was below average. Both do bring playmaking over Marion but I value the defense and rebounding edge more. I can at least see the argument here though.

VOTE SHAWN MARION

My nomination is Terry Cummings. Another solid two way player who didn't get his share of respect in his day. He had a solid career that was very comparable to the two players he was drafted with, James Worthy and Dominique Wilkins for a full 9 years then sufferred a nasty injury and had another long solid stretch but as a mediocre role player which makes people forget how good he was in his peak in San Antonio and Milwaukee where he was around a 20/9 player on terrific defensive teams which declined when he left. His defensive rep wasn't that great but I always thought he was very solid. And, he's another player who stepped up his numbers in the playoffs though without great team success.

Other favorites here -- Fat Lever, Phil Chenier, Cliff Hagan, Spencer Haywood, Neil Johnston.

[therealbig3]

Vote: Chris Mullin

Great offensive player and shooter overall...injuries shortened his career unfortunately, but he was one of the few guys who averaged 25/5/5 (in 89)...great scorer with excellent efficiency, solid playmaker, solid rebounder, and one of the greatest shooters of all time. Came reasonably close to having a 50/40/90 season on multiple occasions (90, 97, 98, and 99).

Nominate: Bob Dandridge

Compared many times throughout the project to guys like Worthy and Marion. I brought him up a few times before, which was a probably a little early, but it's a probably a little late now. He was actually more of a 2nd option than Marion or Worthy, who were more 3rd option players than Dandridge was. Dandridge begins as a 3rd option behind Kareem and Oscar on some fantastic Bucks teams, including the 71 championship team. In fact, he's the 2nd leading scorer on the team in the 71 playoffs.

After Kareem leaves in 75, Dandridge takes over as best player on the team, and he actually leads them to an identical record from the previous season, and a playoff berth. Then in 78 and 79, when Dandridge is in Washington, he plays 2nd option to Elvin Hayes, and the Bullets win the championship in 78. You could actually make the argument that Dandridge is the best scorer on the team. In fact, in the 79 playoffs, Dandridge goes for 23/7/6 on 53% TS (the Bullets make the Finals this year), compared to Hayes's 23/14/2 on 47% TS, and Unseld's 10/13/3 on 52% TS.

Overall, Dandridge is a very good scorer and rebounder (around 10% TRB as a swingman), and he proved throughout his career that he can fit on excellent teams and give them a legitimate 2nd/3rd option scorer, and he was even the 1st option scorer on a playoff team.

[ronnymac2]

Vote: Mitch Richmond

Nominate: Amar'e Stoudemire

I'm voting Mitch because I think he's a bit more dynamic than Mullin was offensively. He was also a solid defensive guard. MJ said he was a handful on both ends and gave his best every night. Dude could do it all offensively, from slashing to shooting to using his strength to bully defenders. Honestly, if he was on a team like the Bad Boys, he'd get more love than Dumars does now.

Nominating Amar'e for the great offense. One of the most efficient big men ever, an all-nba player, and a guy who was the number two on multiple Conference Finalists. Put Gortat next to him at C and those Suns probably win a title.

Not many people are an efficient 25-8 threat with solid passing from the high post. Not many bigs moved like Amar'e either.

[Doctor MJ]

Vote: Chris Mullin

A guy I'd just love to have on my team. Scores at volume and efficiency even while playing with teammates who frankly shoot when they shouldn't. To me he was the top Warrior of the era over Richmond or Hardaway.

Nominate: Spencer Haywood

His name needs to be brought up. I was the one who brought up Connie Hawkins, and when I did I made clear to state why I though he should be ahead of Haywood. I did that because I considered Haywood to be a pretty dang noteworthy player who could start getting support at any time. I realize that he wasn't as dominant in the NBA as people hoped, but he was still basically a lock for all-league honors for a half decade. Yeah someone like Amare's done that too, but only because he got slotted in at center at a time when there are no centers.

[servaisyema]

Other favorites here -- Fat Lever, Phil Chenier, Cliff Hagan, Spencer Haywood, Neil Johnston.

[penbeast0]

I looked up Haywood and Amare and think I have to come down in Amare's favor. They average about the same number of mpg and Haywood actually shoots 2 more shots a game than Amare to score 2pts/game less. Rebound rate is even despite Haywood's inflated rookie season and while Haywood played slightly better defense, he more than makes up for it with attitude problems . . . he thought he was a superstar and didn't listen that well during his peak plus the substance issues. Even the accolades -- really high for both players considering the last 20 people we have nominated -- favor Amare.

If there is no groundswell of support for Terry Cummings, whose defense and intangibles I like a lot better than either although he's not nearly as efficient as Amare either, I could switch.

[Doctor MJ]

I looked up Haywood and Amare and think I have to come down in Amare's favor. They average about the same number of mpg and Haywood actually shoots 2 more shots a game than Amare to score 2pts/game less. Rebound rate is even despite Haywood's inflated rookie season and while Haywood played slightly better defense, he more than makes up for it with attitude problems . . . he thought he was a superstar and didn't listen that well during his peak plus the substance issues. Even the accolades -- really high for both players considering the last 20 people we have nominated -- favor Amare.

If there is no groundswell of support for Terry Cummings, whose defense and intangibles I like a lot better than either although he's not nearly as efficient as Amare either, I could switch.

Well, first as mentioned, the accolades favor Amare because he was categorized as center at a time where there was at first 1 real, healthy center, then none, and then 1 competing with him. No matter how you look at it, in terms of All-NBA accolades, Amare has to come up as one of the most fortunate players in the entire history of the NBA.

I'll note that Haywood actually has the MVP Share edge over Amare even though that doesn't include his ABA year.

Then there's the Nash factor. Yes Amare's got some stellar peak numbers, but his APM numbers were always modest both in Phoenix and New York, and now in New York he's really struggling to find his place. I'll grant that that struggle was at least to some degree predictable simply because the pairing with Melo always seemed a recipe to waste talent through redundancy, but the way he's taken a back seat after getting the situation he wanted does not say great things about the dude.

[lukekarts]

Seeing as DeBusschere is getting no support here I'm going to vote for:

Chris Mullin.

Great shooter, efficient scorer, good team-mate, peaked as an All NBA 1st, deserved HoF. I prefer him to anyone else left on the list.

[penbeast0]

I looked up Haywood and Amare and think I have to come down in Amare's favor. They average about the same number of mpg and Haywood actually shoots 2 more shots a game than Amare to score 2pts/game less. Rebound rate is even despite Haywood's inflated rookie season and while Haywood played slightly better defense, he more than makes up for it with attitude problems . . . he thought he was a superstar and didn't listen that well during his peak plus the substance issues. Even the accolades -- really high for both players considering the last 20 people we have nominated -- favor Amare.

If there is no groundswell of support for Terry Cummings, whose defense and intangibles I like a lot better than either although he's not nearly as efficient as Amare either, I could switch.

Well, first as mentioned, the accolades favor Amare because he was categorized as center at a time where there was at first 1 real, healthy center, then none, and then 1 competing with him. No matter how you look at it, in terms of All-NBA accolades, Amare has to come up as one of the most fortunate players in the entire history of the NBA.

I'll note that Haywood actually has the MVP Share edge over Amare even though that doesn't include his ABA year.

Then there's the Nash factor. Yes Amare's got some stellar peak numbers, but his APM numbers were always modest both in Phoenix and New York, and now in New York he's really struggling to find his place. I'll grant that that struggle was at least to some degree predictable simply because the pairing with Melo always seemed a recipe to waste talent through redundancy, but the way he's taken a back seat after getting the situation he wanted does not say great things about the dude.

I agree on Amare and the accolades but Haywood's history of poor team results in Seattle and substance issues are big issues for me. How do you feel about Terry Cummings v. Haywood?

[colts18]

What about Rasheed? We know his impact in 2004. But according to this link, he had the best 2 year adjusted plus/minus in 05 and 06 http://www.82games.com/lewin3.htm

[Doctor MJ]

I agree on Amare and the accolades but Haywood's history of poor team results in Seattle and substance issues are big issues for me. How do you feel about Terry Cummings v. Haywood?

Cummings is not a guy who has really stood out to me to be honest, but my expertise is not the best. I don't know his game well so I go a lot on stats, and his stats (and accolades) never seemed that impressive. I could certainly buy the argument that Cummings was the better player to build around long term because of his temperament, but to me that says more about Haywood being unworthy than Cummings being worthy.

I suppose I'm seeing a recurring trend of players getting rounded up for playoff performances that didn't result in getting to the finals, and hence have gone under my radar. Says to me that they probably have a point, but I do think it's easy to get too carried away with that.

[Doctor MJ]

What about Rasheed? We know his impact in 2004. But according to this link, he had the best 2 year adjusted plus/minus in 05 and 06 http://www.82games.com/lewin3.htm

Lewin also says that the results with the Pistons are a red flag so severe you can't take it that seriously, which is indeed the case. I actually first started trying to make an APM at around the same time as Lewin and the Pistons made me conclude it was too flawed to rely on very much. Incidentally, what happened was that the starting 5 played so much together that the APMs became extremely exaggerated, with Sheed leading the league, and Hamilton being rated as the worst player in the league. The problem was essentially weak sample size, which is why people started embracing 3+ year samples soon after.

[penbeast0]

Vote:

Marion 1
Mullin 111
Richmond 1


Nominate:

T.Cummings 1
Dandridge 1
Amare 1
Haywood 1