RealGM Top 100 List #23

Moderators: penbeast0, trex_8063, PaulieWal, Doctor MJ, Clyde Frazier

trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 11,806
And1: 7,239
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #23--Wade v. Mikan--Give your reason 

Post#181 » by trex_8063 » Thu Aug 28, 2014 2:17 pm

Sasaki wrote:If we're going to be talking about Mikan because he was dominant in the league despite a short career...why not look at Bill Walton? Far worse career length, but dominant when healthy and the colossal portability issues don't exist - Walton would absolutely be a dominant player today if he wasn't wearing a suit.
.


There are a variety of reasons Walton isn't getting "a pass" on the longevity/durability issues like Mikan (which, fwiw, I don't think Mikan is getting a total pass on that; I believe many of us are counting that slightly against him, just not quite as much as we would for players in other eras). Anyway, here are a few reasons:

*Walton didn't have to wait until age 24 to start playing in a pro league (or at least in a pro league that we here are considering), simply because said pro league didn't exist yet.
**Shoe technology---aiding in protecting the feet and ankles of players---while not up to today's standards, was certainly at least a little better in Walton's time than it was in Mikan's.
***Sports medicine, physical trainers, what franchises were willing shuck out for the care of their players, etc.......all these things were VASTLY different in Mikan's time compared to Walton's (if they were even present AT ALL in Mikan's time). The 50's was an era where a guy may be asked to play thru broken bones (Mikan apparently broke 10 in his career) with nothing more than a splint or similar. The players just weren't as big of an investment for franchises then; there apparently wasn't much motive to protect them.
****The salaries of the time weren't going to "set Mikan up for life", so there was little motive for him to keep playing as long as he possibly could, when he could make similar (or more) money as a low-level executive in another profession.

So there are a handful of relevant reasons why it's not exactly fair to consider longevity in exactly the same way.
"Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience." -George Carlin

"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
Owly
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,307
And1: 2,998
Joined: Mar 12, 2010

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #23--Wade v. Mikan--Give your reason 

Post#182 » by Owly » Thu Aug 28, 2014 2:57 pm

Moonbeam wrote:
Quotatious wrote:
Moonbeam wrote:For what it's worth, I would probably have picked Mikan if we could have counted his BAA season. If we could count his 2 NBL seasons, I would have had no problem placing him in the top 20.

Wait, we're not allowed to take his 1948-49 season into account? (assuming that's the BAA season you're talking about). It doesn't make sense. I mean - if we're taking the ABA into account, why not the BAA? That's even a part of NBA history, as listed by basketball-reference, the BAA evolved into the NBA before the 1949-50 season.


I was under the impression we could not count the 1948-49 season as the main thread says "no pre-NBA". If we can count that season, I'd like to change my vote to Mikan. Another year of mega-dominance is enough for me to place him over Wade and at least a few others already in the list.

fwiw BAA is typically considered NBA "canon" e.g. NBA at 50 it 1996-97 is contingent on NBA history starting with BAA history in 1946-47. Or look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_B ... ssociation. It was the BAA organisation that survived, with a small rump of non-viable teams forming the NBPL from the ashes of NBL in 1950.

Additional stuff for Mikan.

He was so good his first team owner tried to build a league around him. If Mikan hadn't joined the BAA-NBA theres a fair chance it wouldn't exist as it does today

From Peachbaskets to Slam Dunks, p269 wrote:However the comissioner realized too that he had better start filling these arenas with basketball fans, something that had not been happening in the BAA's first two years.
The key to solving Podoloff's and hence the BAA's problem was getting superstars such as George Mikan, Jim Pollard, Bob Davies, and Dolph Schayes to jump ship from the NBL to the BAA. Podoloff had tried hard to do just that, but thus far to no avail. They were not easily persuaded, and until they were the BAA's big arenas would continue to remain sparsely filled.

From Peachbaskets to Slam Dunks, p270 wrote:It did not take long before the BAA's new acquisitions began to yield handsome dividends. Big George Mikan became an instant sensation, packing the fans into the big city arenas as Maurice Podoloff knew he would. And Mikan did not disappoint his fans, scoring as he did at a 28-point-per-game average. So great was the big man as an attraction, that the Madison Square Garden, in advertising an up-coming Knicks-Lakers game, placed on its marquee: George Mikan vs. Knicks."

This book then names him one of the top 3 players all time (through 1987; with Wilt and Russell) for what it's worth.

24 Seconds to Shoot, p36 wrote:To the B.A.A., the bonanzas were Mikan and the near elimination of competition for next year's college stars. Whereever Mikan went, as a visiting player, he filled the house. In a league in which home teams kept all the recpits, that made him as popular as (and synonymous with) money.

The knock on effect of the absence of Mikan is unknown, but without him we can't be sure if there's one clear commercially viable "big league" for basketball. From there does basketball appeal to premier athletes. Then too there are the direct influences on basketball rules. He was so dominant that they changed the rules against him and so good that they had to change the rules to stop teams gaming the system against him (stalling).

Even if you imagine time machining Wade in and everything works perfectly and he doesn't get crippled for showboating, or whistled for palming (maybe he adjusts to the rules fine, though Mikan often isn't getting much leeway in terms of time stuff). You need there to be a league to be able to concieve of this and Mikan is to whatever degree, a/the(?) guy who made it possible.

Mikan missed only two games in his entire career, both due to a viral infection – an amazing feat when you consider the beating he took during games. By the time his playing days were over, he’d taken, by his own estimation, 166 stitches; he’d broken bones in his arm, both elbows, both feet, his nose, and several fingers. He’d lost teeth to opposing players elbows, and he’d eventually have to have a kneecap replaced. There was never a time when he wasn’t covered with bruises.
If I were going hyperbolic in advocating, I'd question whether a guy whose greatest performance was contingent on phantom fouls and who has been injury prone in his own era would see the court with any frequency in Mikan's time (or would he be a Globetrotter). As it is I'll say time machine translation works both ways. If you're confident Mikan translates poorly (or only adequately) and that Wade could flourish in an age when the game was rougher and big-man centric-fine. But if it's just "weak-era, basketball is different" where is the change? And why didn't the leagues turn over their entire rosters, when the game changed so much etc I've seen this argument before and been frustrated by it, it's over simplistic to say "Schayes played Thurmond played Parish played Kobe. Good players remained good players. When's the revolution?" And if you took that argument at face value there's legitimate points about the shot clock and racial barriers. But be sure to have tried to have been consistent. Did you say Russell's 50s success didn't mean much, and the fact he could shoot adequately (well from the field) mean nothing because he was doing it versus whites, that he was fortunate to both snatch the premier white talent of the 60s (Havlicek) and be on the team that was more (and earlier) willing than the others to select from the full talent pool. Did you at the very least satisfy yourself that his impact on arrival in a league not that dissimilar to the one Mikan left is sufficient to vote him where you did. I'm not quite sure about anchoring one player to another for comparison purposes (too advocate-y maybe?), it just seems like Mikan did an awful lot of what Russell did, and with more box-score evidence of causation (not that Russell didn't do well, obviously it's harder to measure individual impact on D; though if the 60s is part of this improved competition then Celtics' SRS impacts become even harder to interpret as a player might have an impact simply by raising the Celts the same amount as the league's own rising standards) and did so with different teams.

Sorry, I'm ranting. The above probably isn't coherant, as ever people have their own criteria, it's just with certain lines of thinking (e.g. super dominant player -with evidence at stats and team and accolade level - versus many guys in the field that often have never been clear cut best at their position - I wouldn't put Wade in that group myself, but say Ewing last time) it can be frustrating. I don't know, I get that that point isn't a great (competition varies) and certainly not a universal case (criteria vary). I could have seen myself voting Stockton, and might just have voted Mikan based on the casualness with which maybe a commenter or two dismissed his career. I just want to get across that they're standing on Mikan's shoulders; that he, perhaps as much as anyone, built this game or at least laid a lot of foundations.
User avatar
PCProductions
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,763
And1: 3,989
Joined: Apr 18, 2012
 

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #23--Wade v. Mikan--Give your reason 

Post#183 » by PCProductions » Thu Aug 28, 2014 3:27 pm

Vote: Dwyane Wade

I just really don't have a strong enough feeling about Mikan's game knowing what I know. I'm not biased against older players necessarily, but while guys have a game that I think hold up well over time (Russell, Big O), Mikan almost certainly does not. The time that he played is just not relevant enough to any time afterwards, and he was at the tail end of a league that played a fundamentally different brand of ball. He dominated, and that's why he's even in consideration against one of the league's most electrifying talents in history, but it simply isn't enough to out-run flash.

I appreciate Mikan's run as a best-in-the-league talent in his day, but there was no shot clock in a noticeably weak era. Wade, meanwhile, has carved out a great career with a peak on the short list of greatest ever. This is Wade for me.
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 11,806
And1: 7,239
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #23--Wade v. Mikan--Give your reason 

Post#184 » by trex_8063 » Thu Aug 28, 2014 3:36 pm

Not to back-seat moderate, but I propose maybe we call this one and move on. Counting original and run-off votes, I have the count at:

Wade--18 (this is counting trsherkin---reasons given post #166---and RayBan-Sematra----post #94 reasons)
Mikan--6

So Wade pretty clearly appears to be running away with this one.
"Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience." -George Carlin

"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
DQuinn1575
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,932
And1: 705
Joined: Feb 20, 2014

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #23--Wade v. Mikan--Give your reason 

Post#185 » by DQuinn1575 » Thu Aug 28, 2014 4:07 pm

Obviously Wade will win - I have him next on my list, so no complaints from one of the Mikan backers.
I have no problem with people being challenged by how much of an era adjustment should be made; I don't know the right answer. I'll try and address a couple of comments from this thread, and plan to write up a more definitive case in the next few days with fact based information. Obviously the interpretation of the facts is up to each voter.

colts18 wrote:
-He played in the toughest era that was fully integrated with blacks and europeans (Parker, Gasol, Ginobili, etc.).
Mikan's era was questionable because black kids of that era weren't allowed to play basketball growing up.
A good portion of them couldn't play because they were in underfunded segregated schools.



They were allowed to play and there was basketball in the schools- the issue was a lot of people, more so blacks didn't stay in high schools
And only LeBron of the top 10 played against europeans.

colts18 wrote: How many potential LeBron's from that era were there that couldn't play without the AAU and college infrastructure?



Well of the top 10 players of all-time, LeBron and probably Shaq are the only ones with the AAU infrastructure.
And LeBron didn't have the college infrastructure.
But, unfortunately, neither did many blacks in the early 50s. And that was a big problem; not just for basketball.


colts18 wrote:They probably chose a more integrated sport like Boxing or Track.


Well 7 of the 8 weight classes were 175 pounds and below. I really don't think the talent pool from basketball ever went to boxing.
Track - could be, but there was no money in track.
There actually was a little money in basketball for the Rens and Trotters.
With an eye on money, they would have chosen baseball. The Negro Leagues paid comparatively well. A lot of the Rens and some Trotters were also Negro League Baseball players.

Doctor MJ wrote:
Even back then his scoring wasn't that great, so I basically take it as a given that he's not doing any star stuff in scoring today.



He was 1st or 2nd in league in scoring on above average TS% - even after the lane widen he had a 61 point game and was 2nd in league in scoring.


Scoring goes down, team still wins:



George Mikan 1951-1954 28.4 18.1 - 63.7%
Kareem Jabbar 1972-1982 34.8 23.9 - 68.7%
Wilt 1962-1967 50.4 24.1 - 47.8%
B_Creamy
Senior
Posts: 728
And1: 755
Joined: Sep 12, 2012
   

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #23--Wade v. Mikan--Give your reason 

Post#186 » by B_Creamy » Thu Aug 28, 2014 5:41 pm

If George Mikan is pretty much set to take the #24 spot on this list we might as well start considering James Naismith for era dominance as well, no?

I don't understand the Mikan support at all. 3 years ago they decided not to include pre-shot clock players into the list but why now do we feel we are more fit to handle the task of evaluating a player who

I. There is almost no footage for and no one saw live

II. Hardly played the same sport as every other guy on the Top 100 list.


So what's Mikan's argument? Rings?
User avatar
RSCD3_
RealGM
Posts: 13,864
And1: 7,273
Joined: Oct 05, 2013
 

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #23--Wade v. Mikan--Give your reason 

Post#187 » by RSCD3_ » Thu Aug 28, 2014 6:15 pm

I will be voting for Dwyane Wade

I think that Wade peaked higher than mikan did in general.

Wade is one of the last two way superstars on this board.

He has put up huge stats in playoff games in his 06/09/10/11 runs

at his peak he was one of the most explosive guards ever and could get into the paint at will

He was also adept in finding the right guys when they were open for a shot

I also have doubts about mikan's portability, people say he has the body type of a slightly taller pekovic with better defensive ability but I don't know if I would put him over Mourning, or even Mutumbo/Dwight
I came here to do two things: get lost and slice **** up & I'm all out of directions.

Butler removing rearview mirror in his car as a symbol to never look back

Peja Stojakovic wrote:Jimmy butler, with no regard for human life
Basketballefan
Banned User
Posts: 2,170
And1: 583
Joined: Oct 14, 2013

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #23--Wade v. Mikan--Give your reason 

Post#188 » by Basketballefan » Thu Aug 28, 2014 6:16 pm

B_Creamy wrote:If George Mikan is pretty much set to take the #24 spot on this list we might as well start considering James Naismith for era dominance as well, no?

I don't understand the Mikan support at all. 3 years ago they decided not to include pre-shot clock players into the list but why now do we feel we are more fit to handle the task of evaluating a player who

I. There is almost no footage for and no one saw live

II. Hardly played the same sport as every other guy on the Top 100 list.


So what's Mikan's argument? Rings?

I dont think it's set in stone that mikan will win #24. As we seen players can lose multiple runoffs before getting in
ceiling raiser
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,501
And1: 3,728
Joined: Jan 27, 2013

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #23--Wade v. Mikan--Give your reason 

Post#189 » by ceiling raiser » Thu Aug 28, 2014 6:20 pm

For those trying to get an idea of his size, here's a picture of Mikan with Wilt (Bob Kurland on the left):

Image

Probably something better out there, but Mikan did seem like a pretty big dude.
Now that's the difference between first and last place.
User avatar
Quotatious
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 16,999
And1: 11,142
Joined: Nov 15, 2013

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #23--Wade v. Mikan--Give your reason 

Post#190 » by Quotatious » Thu Aug 28, 2014 6:24 pm

RSCD3_ wrote:I don't know if I would put him over Mourning, or even Mutumbo/Dwight

Sorry for off-topic, but I find this sentence interesting. Why do you rank Dwight and Dikembe as roughly equal, and Zo ahead of both? I already have Howard over both, but to me, it's Dwight/Alonzo and then Dikembe. What I mean is that Mutombo was never even close to the MVP level that Howard and Mourning were on, because he was simply nowhere near them as a scoring threat, while defensively, it's very close - you may give Mutombo an edge there, but it's still totally incomparable to the offensive gap.
Owly
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,307
And1: 2,998
Joined: Mar 12, 2010

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #23--Wade v. Mikan--Give your reason 

Post#191 » by Owly » Thu Aug 28, 2014 6:45 pm

B_Creamy wrote:If George Mikan is pretty much set to take the #24 spot on this list we might as well start considering James Naismith for era dominance as well, no?
No because he didn't dominate basketball games.

B_Creamy wrote:I don't understand the Mikan support at all. 3 years ago they decided not to include pre-shot clock players into the list but why now do we feel we are more fit to handle the task of evaluating a player who

I. There is almost no footage for and no one saw live

II. Hardly played the same sport as every other guy on the Top 100 list.


So what's Mikan's argument? Rings?

I don't know how on earth your conclusion follows from points (that's assuming they're valid; and the second is vastly overstated). They suggest separating Mikan into a pioneers category, that doesn't make him bad.

His argument has been outlined at length and whilst I can respect those with era concerns, pretending you can't see the case is absurd.

Heck just check the case just given for Wade
I think that Wade peaked higher than mikan did in general.

Wade is one of the last two way superstars on this board.

He has put up huge stats in playoff games in his 06/09/10/11 runs

The reasons for voting Mikan aren't some revolutionary new thing, they're the same sort of reasoning everyone is offering for any other candidate, in this case: a high peak (cf: '49 Win Shares); two way impact; huge in the playoffs.
Basketballefan wrote:I dont think it's set in stone that mikan will win #24. As we seen players can lose multiple runoffs before getting in

Indeed, those following the conversation reasonably closely will have noticed there's a discussion concerning the possibility of Mikan being a run-off loser for an extended period, and whether a continued "spoiler" is an issue.
B_Creamy
Senior
Posts: 728
And1: 755
Joined: Sep 12, 2012
   

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #23--Wade v. Mikan--Give your reason 

Post#192 » by B_Creamy » Thu Aug 28, 2014 7:53 pm

Owly wrote:No because he didn't dominate basketball games.


He invented the sport. I'm sure he dominated every game he played, until people learned the rules maybe. But hey "you can't blame him for weak competition", and at one point (while he was writing the rules) he was SO much better than everyone on earth at basketball that his era dominance should only rightly place him ahead of Mikan.


Owly" wrote:I don't know how on earth your conclusion follows from points (that's assuming they're valid; and the second is vastly overstated). They suggest separating Mikan into a pioneers category, that doesn't make him bad.


I don't completely understand you here. My first point is obviously true, there is hardly any footage of George Mikan even compared to someone like Wilt who people still say they don't have enough footage to fully evaluate.

My second point is hardly "vastly overstated" since the addition of the shot clock is the single most important rule change in basketball history and it happens to coincide exactly with George Mikan's steep decline at the geriatric age of 30. You want to argue the shot clock is irrelevant? Be my guest.

I guess Naismith would also neatly fit into the "pioneers category" if it is to be used. But that "doesn't make him bad".

Owly" wrote:His argument has been outlined at length and whilst I can respect those with era concerns, pretending you can't see the case is absurd.


It appears my era concerns are larger than most around here. I think it's only natural for the sport to evolve and the players to get better. Just in Mikan's case there are a lot more than 100 guys that have come since and been better than him.

Owly" wrote:Heck just check the case just given for Wade
I think that Wade peaked higher than mikan did in general.

Wade is one of the last two way superstars on this board.

He has put up huge stats in playoff games in his 06/09/10/11 runs

The reasons for voting Mikan aren't some revolutionary new thing, they're the same sort of reasoning everyone is offering for any other candidate, in this case: a high peak (cf: '49 Win Shares); two way impact; huge in the playoffs.


Honestly I would like a bit more substance in my analysis than that, regardless of what everyone else is offering. The high peak in this case is in actuality almost certainly a far lower peak than

-Elton Brand
-Rasheed Wallace
-Jack Sikma

Just to name a few guys who won't be nominated on this list for another 60 spots or so but played more impactful two way games than Mikan did for at least as long. Disagree? Tell me why.
tsherkin
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 78,413
And1: 19,947
Joined: Oct 14, 2003
 

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #23 -- Wade v. Mikan 

Post#193 » by tsherkin » Thu Aug 28, 2014 8:05 pm

So yeah, still looking at that G7 from 1970. Going to continue discussing that here for a bit, if no one minds...

In case some do, I'll use a spoiler tag; within said tag is my running commentary about G7 of the 1970 Finals, with comments about West, Baylor, Wilt and Frazier, mostly.

And there it is, all finished. There's a chunk of time, at maybe 6 minutes actually, that wasn't there for me in the 4th quarter from my video source, so that sucked. Baylor shone like crazy during that stretch, and I was waiting for that. Ah well.

Interesting things to see regarding Wilt, West, Baylor and Frazier, as well as the Knicks as a whole.

Spoilered it, in case no one wants to read my long-winded recap, heh.

Spoiler:
Wilt had two offensive rebounds, a put-back tip and was 0/3 from the line in the first two minutes of the game. The Knicks were pressing from the start, and I missed a possession early on where Garrett was trying to advance the ball against Frazier. He was a HUUUGE pest, which is probably a big part of why L.A. was using their forwards to advance the ball, to deny Frazier that opportunity. He was staying with Garrett no problems, making him change directions, attacking the dribble with some reasonable steal attempts, shied him up against the sideline over by the break and made him give up the ball.

That kind of sets the tone for later, tbh.

LOVE watching the passing in Red's system. You can totally see the concepts which would inspire Phil Jackson.

Baylor was practically invisible over the first three minutes of the game. He had an air ball to open the game, a turnover (offensive foul) and then finally made a jumper from the left side. The Lakers were clearly pounding it into Wilt who, despite having "only" 3 FTA and 2 FGA to show by this point, was getting posted and re-posted a fair bit in the half court for the Lakers. He was moving the ball pretty well, didn't have sticky hands, nor did he hold the ball for too long.

I'm noticing that the press didn't seem to bother West any; it was mostly Garrett and Erickson (the guys advancing the ball) who were having trouble with it, as West wasn't really taking the ball over the time line at all in the first quarter. Baylor, Garrett and Erickson were doing that. West's first shot was a beautiful cut to a pass and hard drive to the rim for a floater off glass. Really quick move, very nice. He was pretty clearly playing 2 guard to start this game, not commanding the point at this stage. L.A. forced a turnover on the other end which started that possession; didn't catch who it was, might have been Wilt. Elgin advances after Garrett fouls Frazier for 2 points on FTs, and then West takes a straight-up J against Barnett from the right elbow, missing.

One thing about Wilt, he palms the ball and waves it around while standing in the post a lot, which is stupid. And it turned into a turnover right as I was noticing that. He waves the ball around, pointing, directing, whatever, but he's really crap at guarding the ball (or more accurately, has been in this game). I've seen him play like that a lot, though, and that's a major weakness. He also doesn't seem to dive to the floor; one loose ball went right past his feet as he bent over at the waist and went "eh, not gonna go."

Reed turned it over, the Lakers raced out in transition, West got rejected and boy did Wilt hustle down the floor because he was right there for another offensive board and a put-back jam. West got blocked in transition by Frazier, who BOOKED it down the court to contest that shot.

15-8 New York with 7 to go.

Reed, who had hit a pair of jumpers to this point (not playing super well otherwise, but with his injury, hardly a surprise), was really affecting Wilt's positioning on D, forcing him to come way far out from the rim. BILL BRADLEY managed to squeak in a flip shot, and that was... well, unexpected.

Pull-up 13-footer from Baylor, good. The Lakers actually don't seem to be fighting for shots or getting too grumpy about it. Lots of possessions, lots of shots. To this point, maybe 12 possessions have ended in a shot or FTs for West, Baylor or Wilt, who were 5/9 together (Baylor and West, 3/6, Wilt 2/3 with 3 offensive boards). Wilt had drawn a pair of fouls for 3 FTA, and committed a TOV. Elgin committed that offensive foul for another TOV.

Baylor looks... inconsistent on D. Hands down a lot, backed off of Frazier (who stuck a J on him), but worked around a screen to get his man and then hustled back when the screener peeled baseline to contest the shot. "Decent" is probably the best word so far.

West took a hard fadeaway from the right baseline, miss. 1-4 to this point.

Frazier had 9 points by this time in the game, kind of working over Garrett, who earned his third foul at this point.

FIRST time I see West advancing the ball is now. Left side, goes right, uses the drive to start elbow post. Turns baseline, pump fake, short bank shot from the left low block, money. 2-5 from the field.

West advances again, deals with some physicality well enough, gets a nice pump fake and goes for a 15-foot bank shot from the right elbow but it rims out. Wilt has 6 boards by this point.

West advances again, left side, throws a pretty entry pass to Wilt, who goes middle, comes back baseline for a badly-clanked fadeaway J from maybe 10, 12 feet on the left side. Looked ugly. Wilt really wasn't playing fluid offense when he was looking for his own shot. Ball protection aside, he seemed to have a good command over how to use the ball in the low post to facilitate the rest of the team, but really, his scoring game looks butt-ass ugly. Misses another one of those ugly finger roll things and is now 2/5.

West was 2/6 from the field with no FTs that I recall just a second ago, but now after making 1 FT has 7 points, so I must have missed a pair of FTs somewhere.

As Doc said, the Knicks really were letting fly with a loose shot selection and just DRILLING shots. Most of them were mid-range, in that 10- to 18-foot range, though, and largely contested only weakly or not at all. Not bad shots, really, and often after passes. The ball moved fluidly, but they weren't afraid to pop in transition. It really rained down on the Lakers. 30-17.

West uses pivots to get free for a 17-footer from the left side, boom. Ah, and resolution; the announcers screwed up. After THAT shot, West had 7 points. I was worried, lol. 3/7, 1/1, 7 points. 2:19 to go in the first. 30-19 NYK.

They show a replay of when Willis goes down just before the timeout (he collapses on the play before West's last J) and the replay really shows that Reed and maybe DeBusschere are literally slapping the CRAP out of Wilt's arms as they double him. Wilt goes into his strange squat and tries to power up; Reed backs off, so no foul called, and Wilt unleashes that ridiculous finger roll with his body going straight up... and front-rimming the hell out of the ball. Anyone who wants to mope that he wasn't facing multiple coverage, this is Wilt in his mid-30s getting doubled by New York's front court , and with some good physicality, too.

Next play would be recorded as an assist for Wilt today, a sort of sketchy hand-off play. Dunno if they did so then. But he made the pass to Erickson for a J with minimal delay and such. Good use of him as post playmaker out of an otherwise busted play where the first entry pass was knocked free before Wilt retrieved it.

Erickson pokes the ball away on a fast break and West retrieves it. Pops the J from 15 at the right elbow, misses. Wilt gets a loose ball foul going for the board. Baylor continues to be almost completely invisible. Knicks haven't missed from the line yet.

FINALLY, Wilt gets his finger roll to go, after getting MUCH deeper position on Reed than he'd been getting, and with some decent footwork, too. 3/6 for 6 points, 7 boards (3 offensive), 1 foul, 1 turnover. 1 assist to my eyes. Several hockey assists, though, and I may have missed one or two other assists. He was operating a lot as the playmaker from the post, passing much more than he was shooting.

West turns it over. Next possession, West gets it left side and bugger everyone, he spins baseline and switches to a left-handed dribble, but has drawn the foul, so he doesn't get the shot attempt. Goes 1/2 at the line. Frazier has 15 by now, really working over Dick Garrett.

Wilt on the left block (we really didn't see this much, even though most righties use it as their staple) misses a hook shot. Quick move, decent shot, couldn't make it. Worth mentioning that even really good post players typically hit in the mid-40s for FG% in the 3-10 range. Not a huge surprise that Wilt isn't connecting super-well when he isn't getting a ton of shots closer to the rim. All three of his makes were basically right at the rim. And that's the quarter, 38-24 NYK.

Second Quarter

Frazier was 5/5 from the line, 5/5 from the floor and had 4 assists in the first quarter. Whoo!!! 4 boards, too. He was all over everywhere, causing all kinds of problems for the Lakers, and using his own offense to mess with Garrett (though also playing good defense). This is relevant because in G6, Garrett rocked out for 18 points in the 22-point Laker win. Wilt, of course, had 45 and West 33. Wilt was 5/14 from the line in that game (wow). No Reed and the Knicks were still clinging to their "don't have Frazier shoot much" strategy. That obviously changed, heh.


Hairston starts the second instead of Baylor, who was really, really quiet in the first quarter.

West draws a foul driving right side on the first possession. Notice the FT rules, very different than in our era. There are 1-shot FT possessions. We've already seen West and Wilt both have one.

And would you look at that: West putting on a spin and switching to his left hand dribble (again) in order to combat an aggressive press defense.

People really need to stop saying he didn't have a left hand simply because he didn't rock the ball back and forth endlessly. He knew how to use his body to protect the ball when the defender was crowding him, but preferred to keep his dribble on the right side because it was his stronger side.

Guard post left side, pass out to Hairston, comes back out to the wing, receives the pass, little shoulder juke. Passes to Wilt, who turns it over.

New York shooting 72% from the field at this point, 42-27 NYK.

LA finally getting some ball movement back, working the ball from one side to the other to get Wilt a touch in the post. Perimeter guys pick up their dribble WAY too much so far. Wilt with his terrible, wide-legged dribble of awfulness (though it was great for blocking the defender BEHIND him from getting at the ball). Slowly wheeling around, you know what's coming, just like Kareem's skyhook, back-rims a finger roll. Blocks Reed's J on the other end, but the Knicks score anyway because they get the ORB with Wilt so far from the rim.

West, right wing guard post, left hand dribble, passes to Garrett for a wide-open J. Brick.

Nice feed from Wilt inside to Erickson for the layup with everyone crowding away from the rim. Second assist (at least) on the night for Wilt. Wilt jogs back on defense the next possession after missing an ORB, and the Knicks score. Wilt DRB leads to a West pull-up J in the secondary, giving him 11 points. 4/9 from the field, 3/4 from the line. Frazier gets an off-ball steal and a bucket in transition and hit the FT.

West gets a back-court violation for another TOV. West's 3rd turnover, L.A.'s 9th, that one caused by Riordan. New York KEEPS dropping buckets from 15 to 20 feet like nothing, like layups.

53-31, Frazier goes out, Barnett comes in.

ERickson gets it into Wilt in deep and his finger roll, big, sweeping, HUGE arm motion, goes in. Wilt gets stuck on Barnett on a switch on the other end and Barnett scores. Wilt turns it over on the other end trying to pass out to the pocket, but he was way too far out and the wing's defender just grabbed the pass. Third turnover for Wilt, second that quarter.

Dick Barnett has ugly form on his J and FTs. 57-35 NYK after West makes a pair of FTs after drawing a foul on the right side on a tough, contested J attempt. STILL don't see Baylor, and the Knicks are blowing out the Lakers badly.

New York's still shooting 60% (24/40) from the field at this point to L.A.'s 15/38 (39.5%). Yikes.

Baylor, in case anyone has forgotten, only played 54 games that season, and would only play 11 more games over the rest of his career, not appearing in another playoff game either as his knee issues worsened to the point of being intolerable. We're seeing a lot of John Tresvant, Happy Hairston, Keith Erickson and very little Elgin Baylor, who'd have a big second half (he had 4 points at this stage and finished with 19).

L.A. looked positively impotent this quarter (they only scored 18 points). it was really painful to watch this quarter for L.A., honestly. Frazier? 6/8 FG, 7/7 FT at this stage.

Wilt makes a ponderous move into the lane, then turns for the fade and draws the foul on Reed (his 3rd). Reed takes his first rest at this point. Wilt bricks 3 FTs (and so, SOOOOOO badly), as there was a lane violation. Baylor's back in now. Bowman hacks Wilt and sends him back to the line. The feed flashes a graphic noting that Wilt is second all-time in playoff rebounds, and first in playoff FG%. Bricks the shot, makes the second. So he missed his first 7 FTAs. Baylor, after that loooong rest, misses his first shot, a 17-footer from just above the foul line. West misses another J. New York definitely has livelier legs than the Lakers in this one, jumpers aside. Cazzie Russell and Walt Frazier embody this during the second quarter (Walt, all game, really). 68-35 NYK, 1:10 to go in the half. Knicks shooting 56%, Lakers, 36%. BOTH teams getting worse compared to the earlier update. New York was obviously coming down from the super high, but still getting lots of shots, and more offensive boards than you'd expect with Wilt in there, but L.A. continuing to cough it up and brick their shots. Frazier again sneaks in on the ball-handler as a help defender and grabs a steal, leaking out in transition for a layup.

Stallworth gives a good, Riley-esque foul on Erickson as he tried for a layup. Wilt gets doubled with 20 seconds to go in the half and throws it out but buggers the pass under pressure. Not a turnover, though, as Baylor recovered it, gave it to Erickson... who lost it, but Russell turned it over. 69-40. Erickson heaves it up off of the out of bounds play, Wilt grabs the offensive board and dunks it, giving himself a first-half double-double.

Watching this game, I'm beginning to at least partially revise my opinion of Reed's utility in this series. I still believe Frazier should have clearly won the Finals MVP, but Reed was doing a pretty impressive job denying Wilt the deepest post position, and affecting his ability to impact the game as a shot blocker on the other end. I haven't seen Wilt block a shot yet, though there was that one possession where I think he might have stripped a guy going up for his shot. For someone who was supposed to be a mythical shot blocker, that's pretty remarkable.

3rd Quarter

West opens up the 3rd by hitting an 18-foot jumper.

There was a nice transition opportunity where Baylor made a sweet right-to-left shovel pass to Erickson, who was fouled in the act and went to the line for two. Wilt got a full hand on a rebound but swatted it out; it went to the knicks who swung it around and found an open man for a jumper.

West moves onto Frazier in the third quarter.

It's really interesting to see how the Lakers just don't really care who advances the ball. Baylor, Erickson, West, Garrett, all of them do this interchangeably. There's none of this positional fixation we see now. The Knicks seem more focused on putting the ball in either Barnett's or Frazier's hands behind the time line, then generally give it to Frazier after... but only if it's a walk-up. DeBusschere and Bradley have both grabbed it and run with it out in transition. Lakers start to run a little more and West gets a nice drive for a lay up and Wilt gets a dunk. Their defensive pressure picks up. Frazier really liked using a Reed pick at the top of the circle area, going with it or against it. It's been brutally effective.

West was really effective at pivoting and faking from the post. People knew he could shoot and he baited them HARD into jumping for the ball, then leaned in and drew the foul. Did it again right there and hit the banker for his 18th and 19th points, then goes to the line for 1 for the even 20. Few possessions later, he picks up his fourth foul on a charging call (and a good one, too, out at what would be near the 3pt line today). Frazier steals it from Garrett again and goes coast to coast for the lay-in.

Now we're starting to see some of that defensive pressure people keep talking about with him, that disruptive pressure, not just with ball denial. Was an on-ball steal, too. Following possession, Wilt coughs it up in the post. The more I watch him, the less I am inclined to believe that he was a mythically low-turnover guy when he was a high volume passer in the late 60s. Obviously, this is just one game, but it doesn't look like he's being overly afflicted by chance, just poor handles and dicking around with it in one hand a bit too much, etc.

Frazier was just RIDICULOUS in this game on offense. Dropping Js all over the place, I think he made his first 10 FTAs, just nutty. Crossing and spinning and using screens, I mean he was playing good ball, not just popping the J (he pulled a few quick ones, but mostly just savvy stuff). Brilliant performance.

And yep, the more I watch the second half of this game and how active Wilt is WITHOUT Reed in the game, the more I'm inclined to revise my vitriol from earlier. Reed really was making life quite difficult for Wilt. Strong dude, that one, and his J really bent Wilt's defensive efficacy. Wilt, however, has also been compromised by teammates: he's been generally passing out of the low post pretty well, but everyone seems to miss when he kicks it to them for an open J. There have been 3 or 4 opportunities just this quarter which could have been Laker buckets and Wilt assists if it weren't for their poor shooting. That's something that'll go without mention in the final box score.

DeBusschere has long arms and goes coast to coast a lot this game; he's putting huge pressure on L.A.'s transition defense and punishing them. It really is interesting for me to see so many non-guards handling the ball so freely. They aren't dancing with it or being foolish, just grabbing it and running out on the break. It's very different from now, I find.

West deflects a pass, gets it back and ends up driving into traffic and turning it over. 4th of the game for him.

Red's offense had a lot of passing, a lot of good screen action. Not a ton of isolation at all. I mean, Frazier was doing it, but even when he was, you could see him using mid screens and passing quite a bit. It's quite nice to watch, far more interesting than a lot of contemporary ball, I find.

FINALLY, someone hits off of a Wilt pass, Garrett sticking a J. It's only Wilt's 2nd, or maybe 3rd, assist, despite all of that effort.

Barnett hits a buzzer-beater to make it 94-69 for the Knicks.

4th Quarter

When my youtube link comes back, it's 104-81 somehow, so we've skipped basically 10 or 12 points from each team, which is frustrating.

I dunno if this is the play that we were discussing, but Baylor grabbed an inbounds pass and, without coming down, lobbed it to Wilt, who then gathered, faked and put it in (foul drawn, FT bricked).

The Knicks have varied their defense, pressing or sagging, really keeping the Lakers out of sorts.

Most of that unseen run, by the way, was Baylor. After a foul and one made FT, he had 11 points in the quarter, then made a pretty floating push shot thingy in the lane shortly thereafter for 13 points in the 4th with 4:45 to go in the game. He palmed the ball, went right, hung and just said "screw you" to his defender. Really nice move.

Anyway, the Lakers cut it down as close as 14 (the final margin), but their terrible second quarter and general shooting inefficiency really killed them in this one. Wilt's 1/11 FT performance certainly contributed. The Lakers had at least 24 turnovers. While I watched in the second, third and fourth, West was 5/8 from the field and had a ton of FTAs (10/12), but he shot 3/8 in the first quarter and had 4 fouls and turnovers each over the game. Baylor was essentially invisible outside of the fourth quarter, when he heated up something fierce for the few minutes of the game I don't actually have.

The first half killed LA; they were actually +13 in the second half when they got their brains together, but after getting dusted by 14 points in the first and 13 in the second, they basically didn't have a chance from half time forward without some properly mythical play, and they didn't get especially strong play until the fourth, when they went 30-19 against the Knicks (very much like the 31-18 of the second quarter the Knicks enjoyed).

That first quarter was just UUUUUGGGG-LEEEEEE for L.A., and ultimately lost them the title as much as anything else.

By my count, in the time I watched, Wilt had 20 boards (6 offensive). Don't know what happened in the missing section, of course. I see 8 made field goals, but the official box score has him with 21 points (so the missing FT I didn't see and 4 more FGM). While I watched, he was 8/13 from the field. He wasn't really isolating, though, all of the buckets I saw from him after the fact were clean-up baskets. He pretty much stopped taking his finger roll in the second half... which might be related to his increased efficiency and some of L.A. not wasting so many possessions. Letting him be the clean-up man and a passing hub really was an effective solution for the Lakers.

Frazier was dynamite; I think I've covered a lot of that already.

Baylor, I can at least understand; like I said, this was his last playoff game and he'd only play 9 more regular season games during the remainder of his career. His knee didn't look great and he rested a long time, was otherwise uninvolved a lot of the time he WAS on until that blackout stretch in the 4th where he scored 10 points.
tsherkin
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 78,413
And1: 19,947
Joined: Oct 14, 2003
 

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #23--Wade v. Mikan--Give your reason 

Post#194 » by tsherkin » Thu Aug 28, 2014 8:06 pm

B_Creamy wrote:My second point is hardly "vastly overstated" since the addition of the shot clock is the single most important rule change in basketball history and it happens to coincide exactly with George Mikan's steep decline at the geriatric age of 30. You want to argue the shot clock is irrelevant? Be my guest.


There's also a sharp and immediate drop in his scoring volume and FG% when they widened the lane for the first time.
User avatar
Moonbeam
Forum Mod - Blazers
Forum Mod - Blazers
Posts: 10,128
And1: 4,932
Joined: Feb 21, 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
     

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #23--Wade v. Mikan--Give your reason 

Post#195 » by Moonbeam » Thu Aug 28, 2014 8:12 pm

tsherkin wrote:
B_Creamy wrote:My second point is hardly "vastly overstated" since the addition of the shot clock is the single most important rule change in basketball history and it happens to coincide exactly with George Mikan's steep decline at the geriatric age of 30. You want to argue the shot clock is irrelevant? Be my guest.


There's also a sharp and immediate drop in his scoring volume and FG% when they widened the lane for the first time.


Could that drop also be explained by Mikan breaking his leg in the 1951 playoffs?
tsherkin
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 78,413
And1: 19,947
Joined: Oct 14, 2003
 

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #23--Wade v. Mikan--Give your reason 

Post#196 » by tsherkin » Thu Aug 28, 2014 8:22 pm

Moonbeam wrote:Could that drop also be explained by Mikan breaking his leg in the 1951 playoffs?


I doubt it, unless you think medicine in the 50s was so bad that they couldn't heal a broken bone well enough that he'd be back to form two or three years later. We've known and been adept at setting and healing broken bones for centuries, and it's not like he was facing staggering athletic competition. They put a plate on it and he was still mobile enough to get out there and average a playoff-high 24 ppg (of course the fracture happened before the divisional series). He shot 40.8% FG on those playoffs according to b-r, and 4 out of the 7 games were the series where his leg was busted.

No, I think the rule change is considerably stronger an explanation.
User avatar
Texas Chuck
Senior Mod - NBA TnT Forum
Senior Mod - NBA TnT Forum
Posts: 85,503
And1: 88,333
Joined: May 19, 2012
Location: Purgatory
   

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #23--Wade v. Mikan--Give your reason 

Post#197 » by Texas Chuck » Thu Aug 28, 2014 8:26 pm

B_Creamy wrote:
Owly wrote:No because he didn't dominate basketball games.


He invented the sport. I'm sure he dominated every game he played, until people learned the rules maybe. But hey "you can't blame him for weak competition", and at one point (while he was writing the rules) he was SO much better than everyone on earth at basketball that his era dominance should only rightly place him ahead of Mikan.




Uh Naismith essentially never played basketball. He was never a dominant player at any point. The problem with exaggerating to make your point is you need to have at least passing familiarity with the guy you choose to use.
ThunderBolt wrote:I’m going to let some of you in on a little secret I learned on realgm. If you don’t like a thread, not only do you not have to comment but you don’t even have to open it and read it. You’re welcome.
User avatar
Texas Chuck
Senior Mod - NBA TnT Forum
Senior Mod - NBA TnT Forum
Posts: 85,503
And1: 88,333
Joined: May 19, 2012
Location: Purgatory
   

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #23--Wade v. Mikan--Give your reason 

Post#198 » by Texas Chuck » Thu Aug 28, 2014 8:28 pm

tsherkin wrote:
Moonbeam wrote:Could that drop also be explained by Mikan breaking his leg in the 1951 playoffs?


I doubt it, unless you think medicine in the 50s was so bad that they couldn't heal a broken bone well enough that he'd be back to form two or three years later. We've known and been adept at setting and healing broken bones for centuries, and it's not like he was facing staggering athletic competition.

No, I think the rule change is considerably stronger an explanation.



The rule change likely had more to do with it to be sure. But let's not act like medicine hasn't come a long way in treating athletes so they can go back and compete. Just setting a broken bone is hardly what's done today. Modern medicine is one of the biggest advantages modern players have.
ThunderBolt wrote:I’m going to let some of you in on a little secret I learned on realgm. If you don’t like a thread, not only do you not have to comment but you don’t even have to open it and read it. You’re welcome.
tsherkin
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 78,413
And1: 19,947
Joined: Oct 14, 2003
 

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #23--Wade v. Mikan--Give your reason 

Post#199 » by tsherkin » Thu Aug 28, 2014 8:43 pm

Chuck Texas wrote:
The rule change likely had more to do with it to be sure. But let's not act like medicine hasn't come a long way in treating athletes so they can go back and compete. Just setting a broken bone is hardly what's done today. Modern medicine is one of the biggest advantages modern players have.


For ligament/tendon damage, for draining fluid, for broken bones in mobility areas, sure. For pedestrian fractures and single-bone fractures in the lower leg, it's not really a ton different. Yeah, some of the materials they use are less likely to cause infection, the drug treatments for such are in a similar state, but really, you break your leg, it will suck for a while and then you'll get on with it. He broke his bone BEFORE the series and was still sufficiently mobile with the plate in place to play the series at what was considered a reasonably high level at the time. That's all about stabilizing the bone in position, which they did. Orthopedics have certainly advanced in the interim period, but we're talking about finesse stuff for like plateau fractures or joint-related stuff, and then for handling soft-tissue problems.

He didn't break it badly enough that he couldn't play. That says most of what need be said on the topic. And again, we've been resetting and stabilizing broken bones since at LEAST the Middle Ages, it's not rocket science. We don't even know which bone he broke. I also must point out that it is most frequently described as a fracture, which isn't necessarily the same thing as a full-through break. The league delayed the series a day upon appeal from the Lakers. We also don't know what bone it was, since reports/accounts vary on whether it was his leg or his ankle. We know it didn't seem to bother him as far as scoring, more so for running, jumping (and specifically by his own account, rebounding).

So it's really hard to say. Obviously, it hurt him in series, but you'd have to REALLY rip on 50s doctors for not being any good at all for him to have such lingering effects that he suffered so obvious a drop-off in time with a major rules change that made it no longer possible for him to play the whole offensive possession directly beneath the hoop as he usually did.

Meantime, other major indicators of his ability to exert his will on the court like rebounding stayed the same. Games played stayed similar. He even got close to 40% again with a 39.9% in 52-53, but we see his volume and efficiency in general decline from that point forward, and it seems really poor focus to shift the blame from a major rule change that fundamentally affected the way he had to play the game and to a bone injury that isn't really described as a grotesquely crippling thing or atypical in any major fashion.
User avatar
Texas Chuck
Senior Mod - NBA TnT Forum
Senior Mod - NBA TnT Forum
Posts: 85,503
And1: 88,333
Joined: May 19, 2012
Location: Purgatory
   

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #23--Wade v. Mikan--Give your reason 

Post#200 » by Texas Chuck » Thu Aug 28, 2014 8:46 pm

That sure was a lot of words to say "we agree". :D
ThunderBolt wrote:I’m going to let some of you in on a little secret I learned on realgm. If you don’t like a thread, not only do you not have to comment but you don’t even have to open it and read it. You’re welcome.

Return to Player Comparisons