RealGM Top 100 List #57

[penbeast0]

op PG left is probably Chauncey Billups; never been sold on Cousy but you have to consider him here. Nate Archibald and Penny Hardaway are the main short peak guys. Tim Hardaway and Mark Price are a small step down.

Wings: Sam Jones and Vince Carter had long outstanding careers though Sharman and Greer were considered better than Sam Jones in their peaks but the numbers for Jones look better, Arizin is the other main 50s guy. . Nique is a step down with his efficiency and defensive issues. Sidney Moncrief may be the 3rd greatest 2 guard ever . . . for 4 years, but his injuries limit his career value.

Best bigs left: Elvin Hayes is the Iverson/Nique type with weak efficiency (and poor passing) but with excellent defense and rebounding, and he was an ironman. My favorite is Mel Daniels with his 2 ABA MVPs and 3 rings (2 as clearly the best player) -- played like Alonzo Mourning offensively and Moses defensively. Bill Walton, Connie Hawkins, and Bob McAdoo for short peak guys . . . in that order for me I would guess. McAdoo, Neil Johnston, Amare, Issel, Spencer Haywood have offensive creds but bigs who don't play defense are problematic for me. Ben Wallace, Nate Thurmond, or the Worm also could come up here as well as guys like DeBusschere, Bobby Jones, etc., even Zelmo Beaty and Yao Ming. Lots of names to consider.

With English voted in, I am open to persuasion. I'd love to vote Moncrief or Daniels, would love to hear a good head to head discussion of Sam Jones v. Vince Carter; and, I'm wide open to strong arguments for any of these or for that matter, about 10 others.

Vote: Sidney Moncrief -- very short peak but gives you GOAT man defense and superefficient 20ppg scoring. His peak is at least 1/4 of Walton's peak in my opinion and with Walton only making healthy through the season once as a starter, I'd rather take my chances on a 5 year ride with the Squid. He lost out to the Bird Celtics or (when he beat them) the fo fo fo Moses/Erving Sixers during the era of superteams and his playoffs are mixed -- he abused a young Michael Jordan's defense and had some monster runs but also some weak ones -- though his defense shut down several opposing scorers even in the weaker offensive runs.

Voted Sam Jones last time, am willing to be convinced for several people.

[JordansBulls]

Vote: Dominique Wilkins

2nd in MVP voting a peak year for most superstars such as Bird, Magic, Hakeem, Kareem and the scoring champion. One of the greatest offensive players of all time and was one of the wisest players on the floor as well. Also voted a top 3 player in 1989 by Walt Frazier behind MJ and Magic.

[penbeast0]

Wisest? I don't remember NIque having a particularly impressive basketball IQ. Classy person and good team guy but don't remember him being particularly wise out there.

[trex_8063]

Wha?.....really? Iverson's finally in? What....what will I do now?


Seriously, not sure who I want to go for at this point. Hayes is my off-the-cuff answer. I was critical of his shooting efficiency in the last thread (even when being compared to Allen Iverson). However, I'd still rate him an above average scorer---I think you can hardly claim a guy who was 7 times in the top 10 in scoring, one-time scoring champ, and is 8th all-time in career points is otherwise.......I just no longer think he's anywhere near as good a scorer as those benchmarks would indicate. In fact, I truly only rate him slightly above average as a scorer. But that's still something.
Add to it he was a good (even very good??) defender, a very good rebounder, and he was these things for an awful lot of years/games/minutes. He was one of the game's true ironmen: where longevity/durability is concerned, he's arguably a top 10 all-time. Appeared to up his play in the playoffs, and was one of the principle stars of a title team. All these things combined makes for a considerable amount of career value, imo.

Wilkins is another I could give strong consideration to. Excellent scorer, roughly on par with someone like Melo. Really Melo/Wilkins make a nice comparison; I rate Wilkins a little higher based almost entirely on longevity, though.

I'd really like to see Bob Cousy gaining traction by now. Maybe I'll make a post on him if I have time, though I'm not seeing anyone else express interest in him yet.

And lastly, Owly's really got me thinking hard about throwing in with Bob Lanier.

At any rate, I haven't missed a vote yet in this project, and I don't intend to start now. I'll make a decision before the deadline.......

[Clyde Frazier]

Will be voting hayes again, but will also start looking at the following players:

- cousy
- sam jones
- sharman
- carter
- arizin
- nique
- lanier
- mcadoo
- thurmond

[ronnymac2]

Vote: Vince Carter

My true contenders for this spot are Nate Thurmond and VC.

Vince was one of the most dynamic players in the golden era of shooting guards. His passing out of pick-n-roll while in New Jersey made him similar to his cousin, Tracy McGrady. His explosiveness, 3-point shooting, and low turnover rate in Toronto made him a super portable offensive menace for the Raptors.

After ending his prime in New Jersey, he willingly turned into a valuable role player, even coming off the bench for some strong teams like Dallas last year and Memphis this year.

Spoiler:

Bigs: Nate Thurmond, Ben Wallace, Bob Lanier, Bob McAdoo

Worms: Dennis Rodman

Wings: Vince Carter, Paul Arizin, Dominique Wilkins, Penny Hardaway, Manu Ginobili, Sidney Moncrief, Grant Hill

Point Guards: Nate Archibald, Kevin Johnson, Chauncey Billups, Deron Williams, Mark Price

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

Wisest? I don't remember NIque having a particularly impressive basketball IQ. Classy person and good team guy but don't remember him being particularly wise out there.

I don't know a about wise for Nique but he made a lot of good quick intuitive decisions. Everybody understands the spectacular athleticism of Wilkens but that doesn't mean that Wilkens wasn't also a solid ball player mentally.

The Fratello Hawks were a good defensive team and Wilkens was part of that.

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

VC vs Wilkens is a tough call. The peak of Bernard King's peak was so great that I would vote King in just for his peak.

Nate Archibald is the only player to lead the league in assists and scoring during the same year. I wonder how prime Archibald and would have been in place Iverson on the Finals 76ers? I never saw prime Archibald but old Archibald playing for the Celtics played an Iverson like game of slicing around and through the big men, except that Archibald finished better at the rim and was far better at finding open teammates than Iverson.

I think either Tim Hardaway or Archibald are the best point guard left. I put pre injury Anfernee Hardaway above Billups.

On offense I prefer Mark Price to Billups. Price has a higher career PER than Billups. How bad was Price on defense? I didn't consider Billups anything special on defense.

[Joao Saraiva]

Player I'm thinking of:
- Vince Carter;
- Dominique;
- Bill Walton;
- Bernard King;
- Billups.

I think I'm leaning more towards Billups but I'll think about it later today. I'd like to get Bill Walton in, but he really lacks longevity.

[penbeast0]

I thought about Walton too, but he really hurt those Portland and San Diego teams. He was a max money player for his day (and very adamant about that) and they had to build around him . . . then he would go down with foot problems every year. He had that one great year which is top 20 all-time NBA peaks . . . but that was it until he finally made it through a season in Boston as a reserve. I think you win more titles with Moncrief who can defend a star guard more effectively than anyone else in history (not as good a help defender as someone like Scottie Pippen though) AND who can score close to 20 a game on 60% efficiency for about 5 years . . . you can build around that. However, his longevity is his real drawback too; but compared to Nique, I think he's more than twice as likely to help you build to a ring with his defense AND his efficiency to counter Nique's appreciably longer career. Carter similar with more efficiency but also the screwing over of Toronto; I think those things matter. King was a spectacular scorer but neither a good defender nor a good teammate and another short peak; his scoring is not nearly as big an advantage over Sid as Sid's defense and leadership is over King. Billups is a unique player with his game, he's one of those guys like Rodman that it's tough to have comps for.

You may disagree but that's how I see Moncrief v. the players you mention.

[Owly]

Voting Lanier again: From the last thread the main point and a more vague argument on

I'm voting Bob Lanier once again, another composite post of my previous stuff why below

I'm voting Bob Lanier
Reasoning: looks like the best career added value by crude faux-EWA/WS combination. He's also high on a similar peak based ranking which I ended up posting a few threads back (43rd, and all those above him still available didn't maintain their peak anything close to how he did, and/or have era concerns).

Spoiler:

PPR Score PPR Rank name
29.69848481 17 Amare Stoudemire
32.80243893 18 Neil Johnston
43.56604182 25 Paul Arizin
47.38143096 26 Bob McAdoo
54.3783045 30 Walt Bellamy
55.90169944 31 Terrell Brandon
63.07138812 33 Elton Brand
65.30696747 35 Ed Macauley
67.53517602 36 Emanuel Ginobili
68.01470429 37 Arvydas Sabonis
76.53103945 42 Larry Foust
77.46612163 43 Bob Lanier

All with era concerns; longevity/peak maintainance issues and/or problems defense/intangiables (Manu probably the least but minutes is an issue; for a comp see http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... 01&y2=2015).

Team level D might be held against him but his Drtg (hardly perfect, but I think sufficient for the point/claim being made) in '74 when he played 81 games led the league.

A concern might be that he missed quite a few games, including playing (just) less than 65 games and 2500 minutes for three of his five short prime/extended peak years ('76, '77 and '78 of '74-'78). Still for that 5 year span he looks like the 2nd or 3rd best player in the league (even after minutes are factored in) and he lasted much better than McAdoo.
cf:
The five year span in question http://bkref.com/tiny/64BQL
The 70s: http://bkref.com/tiny/0DbJe

Reviews on D

Lanier is the big difference. He played only when in the mood before last season. He concentrated more on stopping other teams from penetrating and fourth in blocked shots with 247.

[individual bio]
Called "Moses" by his teammates ... For leading them out of the wilderness ...... trimmer last season ...... Defense was his biggest improvement

Depending on who's in there, the Pistons can make you work. When one of the "whos" is either Trapp or Howard Porter, the opponents can relax a bit. But Rowe, Ford, Mengelt, Kevin Porter, Money and Lanier will get down and play some defense. Lanier, in fact often surprises people by jumping out to pick up guards or forwards. He also clogs the middle nicely.
[individual bio]
Has become a very intimidating defensive player who, like Dave Cowens, is not afraid to switch out on unsuspecting forwards and guards.

Somewhat confusing. Lanier is a mammoth figure to try and get around [and some other decent players but the Porters are bad and the bench "woefully weak" ... comunication and fouling called a problem, perhaps coaching semi-implied as a problem based on that?]
[individual bio]
Can rebound, block shots, play defense, do everything but clean the kitchen floor ...... [unrelated but I've touched on this] Injuries have been a problem, though, but he has always played hurt

[Vitale will be looking to emphasize D] Lanier gives him a head start. That is the advantage of having a big center. Lanier seals off the middle and is tough and aggressive.

[individual bio]Devensively he can be as imposing as Kareem Abdul-Jabbar or Bill Walton or Artis Gilmore

Depending on how much you allow hypotheticals, you might also consider that Detroit rushed him back in his rookie year which may have been detrimental to his long term health.

One quick and dirty study of his impact.

'76 Pistons
team points differential over the year -86 over 82 games, -1.048780488 per game
team points differential over 18 games without Lanier -92 over 18 games, -5.111111111 per game
team points differential over 64 games with Lanier +6 over 64 games, 0.09375 per game


'77 Pistons
team points differential over the year -85 over 82 games, -1.036585366 per game
team points differential over 18 games without Lanier -107 over 18 games, -5.944444444 per game
team points differential over 64 games with Lanier 22 over 64 games, 0.34375 per game

Lanier('s impact) looks a little worse in '78
'78 Pistons
team points differential over the year -102 over 82 games, -1.243902439 per game
team points differential over 19 games without Lanier -100 over 19 games, -4.347826087 per game
team points differential over 63 games with Lanier -2 over 63 games, -0.031746032 per game

Players with as many or more top 2000(ish) player seasons (as before not absolutely up to date- LeBron should now be on there) by PER (17.9+)

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar 18
Karl Malone 17
Shaquille O'Neal 17
Kevin Garnett 17
John Stockton 17
Tim Duncan 16
Hakeem Olajuwon 16
Kobe Bryant 16
Moses Malone 16
Charles Barkley 15
Paul Pierce 14
Clyde Drexler 14
Michael Jordan 13
Wilt Chamberlain 13
Dirk Nowitzki 13
Robert Parish 13
David Robinson 12
Oscar Robertson 12
Earvin "Magic" Johnson 12
Larry Bird 12
Jerry West 12
Patrick Ewing 12
Dominique Wilkins 12
Steve Nash 12
Allen Iverson 12
Bob Pettit 11
Bob Lanier 11
Adrian Dantley 11
Elgin Baylor 11
Vince Carter 11
Larry Nance 11
Pau Gasol 11
Alex English 11
Chris Webber 11

Players with as many top 2000ish player seasons as Lanier by WS/48 (.144+)

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar 18
John Stockton 18
Karl Malone 17
Tim Duncan 16
Reggie Miller 16
Shaquille O'Neal 15
Hakeem Olajuwon 15
Charles Barkley 15
Kevin Garnett 14
Kobe Bryant 14
Moses Malone 13
Paul Pierce 13
Wilt Chamberlain 13
Dirk Nowitzki 13
Robert Parish 13
David Robinson 13
Oscar Robertson 13
Earvin "Magic" Johnson 12
Jerry West 12
Adrian Dantley 12
Bill Russell 12
Ray Allen 12
Michael Jordan 11
Larry Bird 11
Steve Nash 11
Bob Pettit 11
Bob Lanier 11
Larry Nance 11
Bailey Howell 11
Detlef Schrempf 11

Other discussion from earlier threads

I'm not as familiar with Lanier, but those WOWY numbers Owly is posting make him certainly worth a big look. Still, I wonder whether he is a superior candidate to someone like Elvin Hayes.

Look at any boxscore metric and it will say Lanier peaked (much) higher, I suspect they'd all say he added more career value and tbh how "valuable" at this point in the list are, for instance, Hayes' Win Shares garnered from sub .100 WS/48 seasons - he gets 19 Win Shares from such seasons - set greatness impact replacement level at something like .120 WS/48 and you'd take a huge chunk out of his apparent contribution, ditto with PER - where he never hit 20, which Eric Murdock and Matt Geiger did, okay that's OTT, and as I've said before the range/SD seems like it might be less in the 70s but in any case that affects Lanier just as much anyway.

Lanier doesn't have Hayes' baggage as a teammate (not sure he was entirely happy/positive by the end in Detroit but nothing like Hayes) and he rates as better by the metrics in the playoffs despite playing a large chunk of his playoff career past his prime in a tough conference (80s East). Lanier being a more willing passer might make him easier to build around too.

What does Hayes have an edge in? D, probably (though positional competition isn't equal on the accolade front), and minutes. To me, it's not nearly enough.

I can't think really of another angle to analyse this from. I'd guess he's portable as he can score from the post, he space the floor and shoot the J, and it seems like at his best (anecdotally) he could defend guys out on the floor as well as play a more conventional anchor, and his assist % is pretty strong for a big man (double Hayes' 14.4 to 7.0).

New angle. Wins above very good. Lanier versus last times runoff loser Elvin Hayes.

Seasons in top 2046 player seasons (i.e. WS/48 .144 or above)
Number of seasons in top 2026 player seasons (i.e. PER 17.9 or above)

Obviously this is similar to the stuff above but I figured it might be interesting to see how big the gap is by this measure.

Hayes has 3 seasons above the WS/48 bar. Two clearly so, one only marginally.

'75: 2.0934375 WS Wins Above Very Good
'77: 2.032416667 WS-WAVG
'79: 0.129375 WS-WAVG

Hayes Total: 4.255229167 WS-WAVG


Lanier WS Wins Above Very Good
'74: 5.268770833 WS-WAVG
'79: 3.129479167 WS-WAVG
'76: 3.002979167 WS-WAVG
'77: 3.006541667 WS-WAVG
'75: 3.422604167 WS-WAVG
'81: 1.497354167 WS-WAVG
'82: 1.0655 WS-WAVG
'73: 1.115625 WS-WAVG
'82: 0.662 WS-WAVG
'84: 0.669 WS-WAVG
'79: 0.420520833 WS-WAVG

Total: 23.260375

In PER, Hayes has 9 seasons over the 17.9 "very good" bar. Here his extra minutes should tell more, as much as they ever will (note also that two of his top three seasons now come on the Rockets)

'77: 3.179900498 PER/EWA Wins Above Very Good
'71: 2.71119403 PER/EWA-WAVG
'72: 2.582835821 PER/EWA-WAVG
'79: 1.853731343 PER/EWA-WAVG
'75: 1.896268657 PER/EWA-WAVG
'69: '1.838308458 PER/EWA-WAVG
'76: 0.740049751 PER/EWA-WAVG
'70: 0.729353234 PER/EWA-WAVG
'74: 0.53761194 PER/EWA-WAVG

Total: 16.06925373 PER/EWA-WAVG


PER/EWA Wins Above Very Good for Lanier
'78: 7.933283582
'75: 9.659452736
'74: 9.095522388
'72: 7.99920398
'77: 6.206268657
'76: 5.642985075
'73: 6.582089552
'79: 3.469154229
'80: 2.650497512
'71: 2.107313433
'81 1.569850746

Lanier Career WAVG 62.91562189

Okay by valuing high (metrics) peaks, that favours Lanier. Still if you believe greatness is near essential for titles then it's at least worth looking at.

Edited to make data slightly clearer.

[trex_8063]

I just wanted to put out a feeler for Bob Cousy. I certainly feel he belongs in the discussion at this point. So here are some details....

Here is the overall snap-shot of Cousy’s career:
Extended Prime Cousy (‘52-’61)--697 rs games
Estimated Per 100 Possessions (rs): 21.9 pts, 6.1 reb, 8.8 ast @ 44.9% TS% (-0.4% to league)
PER 20.1, .139 WS/48 in 37.4 mpg
Estimated Per 100 Possessions (playoffs): 20.3 pts, 5.5 reb, 8.8 ast @ 43.5% TS%
PER 18.0, .121 WS/48 in 40.7 mpg
Career rs WS: 91.1
Career playoff WS: 9.1

6-Time NBA Champion (at least 3 as the 2nd-best/most important player, never less than the 4th-best player)
13-Time All-Star
10-Time All-NBA 1st Team
2-Time All-NBA 2nd Team
1-Time league MVP (‘57, ahead of Bob Pettit)
#36 All-Time in MVP Award Shares
Seven times he factored into the MVP voting, never lower than 8th (four times in the top 4)
#33 All-Time in RealGM RPoY shares

The guy was still a presence to be reckoned with late in his career. At age 34---in a league that was becoming integrated and had quite a few athletic stars (Russell, Wilt, West, Oscar, Baylor, Pettit, as well as Bellamy, Wilkens, etc)---he still avg 13.2, 2.5, and 6.8 for the best team in the land; in his final game as a Celtic (game 6 of the finals), despite sprained ankle late in game, came up with 18 pts while helping to hold Frank Selvy and Dick Barnett to a combined 15 pts.

He led THREE #1 offenses ('53-'55), this was before he was joined by Russell and Sam Jones.

I know he's criticized for his inefficient shooting, though I think it's sometimes overstated. For instance, he was actually ABOVE league average ts% for SIX of his thirteen full seasons (by an avg of +1.0%, once by as much as +2.5%). As noted above, during his prime (which extends into the 60's), he was just barely below league avg overall (-0.4%), and is just -1.0% ts for his whole career. Where shooting efficiency is concerned that's not as bad as Hayes (-2.5%) or Isiah Thomas (-2.1%), and is a couple hundredths of a percent better than Iverson.

His popularity and influence on ball-handling trends is no mere trifle, either (imo).

Not saying Cousy is my vote for this spot (though I’m considering him), but it certainly seems he ought to be in the discussion by this time; so I'm looking to start that up.

[Joao Saraiva]

My vote goes to Chauncey Billups.

9 years of great basketball, from 2003 to 2011.

5 seasons above 20 PER peaking at 23.6.
5 seasons above 20 WS/48. Peaked at 25.7.
3 post seasons above or equal to 20 PER, peaked at 22.9.
4 post seasons above 20 WS/48, peaked at 24.9.
6 seasons above 60%ts, and 3 seasons above 60%ts.

He has great advanced stats.

His raw numbers are also good, even tough not spectacular. He scored 20 PPG some seasons, and has arround 7 APG. But his impact isn't in question:
- he could score at good volume and great efficiency for a guard, took big shots, scored well from 3, scored great FT shooter, penetrated well and could post up when he had a good matchup;
- he played well within the system of the Pistons, assisted well and made the right passes. While his APG numbers aren't exceptional, his TOs are really low. Never above 3 TOPG in any season. Some seasons under 2 TOPG. That is taking care of the ball at elite level;
- good PG on defense. Didn't gamble much, but stayed in fron of his man and wasn't posted up easily by stronger guys.

In terms of team success he did it all:
- Won a championship, won the finals MVP award, went to the finals in 2005, got several times to the ECF and had a lot of years with a great record in the regular season too.

Accodales:
- Finals MVP;
- Top 5 in MVP voting once, top 10 in another season;
- 2nd NBA team once, 3rd NBA team twice;
- 2nd all defensive team twice;
- Top 5 FT shooter 6 seasons;
- top 5 in ts% twice, and that's amazing for a PG;
- 1st in ORTG once on a defensive oriented team;
- 6 times top 10 in WS/48, had a 2nd place once;
- 5 times all-star.

It was a difficuit choice for me, I feel like several players have a case against Billups, like Vince Carter for example or Bernard King. But I'm going with Billups. I think he's one of the PGs you can show on tape to young players and tell them: this is how a PG should play. Get other guys involved, scoring when needed, defending well, taking care of the ball... His game really does the talk. Fantastic player.

[Quotatious]

Vote: Elvin Hayes

Great defender (IMO definitely top 20 ever), very good rebounder, decent scorer (not really efficient, but still someone that you could go to, in the post - more skilled than his mediocre efficiency suggests), incredible longevity/durability, very solid playoff performer (at least compared to his regular season career - he was actually a more productive player in the postseason, which isn't really a common theme with most players).

I feel like there are some players still available with higher peaks than Hayes, but IMO no one who can match or exceed his overall career value.

[Clyde Frazier]

Vote for #57 - Elvin Hayes

- 16 year career
- 6x all NBA (3 1st, 3 2nd)
- 2x all defensive 2nd team
- 2 top 3 and 4 top 10 MVP finishes
- 1x NBA champion

Hayes had unbelievable durability: in his 16 seasons in the league, he played in 80+ games in every season, missing a total of 9 games.

REG SEASON 69-79
23.7 PPG, 14.5 RPG, 2 APG, 1 SPG, 2.5 BPG, 45% FG, 67% FT, 49% TS, .130 WS/48

PLAYOFFS 69-79
23.2 PPG, 13.1 RPG, 1.9 APG, 1.2 SPG, 2.6 BPG, 47% FG, 65.3% FT, 50.6% TS, .143 WS/48

While he wasn't a very efficient scorer in his prime, he wasn't abysmal, either. From 69-79, his TS% of 49% was slightly below the league avg of 50.6% during that span. He also shot better in the playoffs at a 50.6% TS clip. I will still take a player's ability to score at ~average efficiency over a player who can't score at all. He used his above average athleticism on both ends of the floor to his advantage, and helped the bullets to 3 finals runs including a championship in 78.

He also had a good case for finals MVP in 78. Per writer Dave Heeren:

Remember the Elvin Hayes incident? During the 1978 playoffs, the Championship series between Washington and Seattle reached the seventh game. Rick Barry, whose Golden State team had not qualified for the playoffs that year, was announcing that game and doing his usual candid job. He pointed out that one of the referees had a short temper and that he was especially apt to make hasty foul calls against Hayes, whom he did not like because Hayes did a lot of complaining about his calls. Hayes, who had been the series' outstanding player to that point, picked up his fourth foul during the third quarter and argued before going to the bench. The same official whistled him for his fifth and sixth fouls in quick succession after he reentered the game early in the fourth quarter. Replays showed that Hayes had not committed either of the fouls. On one of them there had been no physical contact at all.

But Hayes was out of the game, and a vindictive referee could have deprived Washington of a league championship becaus the Bullets were ahead by 8 or 10 points when Hayes went out. Paced by Bob Dandridge, the Bullets did hold on to win. But Hayes was deprived of an award he wanted and deserved. Since he had not played during the closing minutes of the championship game, the championship series MVP trophy was given to Wes Unseld. Unseld, then in the twilight of his career, had produced little offense for the Bullets and had been victimized by Seattle center Marvin Webster for 30 points, or a basket more or less, in the final game.

There's talk about attitude problems with hayes, but that largely seemed to be off the court-related, and that doesn't matter to me unless it affects on the court performance.

However, once he came the Bullets, he instantly seemed to mesh with the team, both on and off the court. Combining with Wes Unseld to anchor a potent double post offense that dominated on the boards, Hayes' arrival allowed coach Gene Shue to play an up-tempo, fast breaking three guard lineup that improved from 38 to 52 wins in just one year. The team never looked back and was a legitimate juggernaut for the rest of the 1970s.

http://www.bulletsforever.com/2012/8/22 ... on-bullets

When hayes went to the bullets, he cut his shot attempts down to 18.3 per game from 75-79 vs. 69-74 where he took 23.4 per game. He adapted his game and became a major factor in helping them win the championship. His game did change for the better in washington. I wouldn’t call it lucky for hayes to end up next to unseld on the front line, because if he really was that rigid, it wouldn’t have worked out. It’s not uncommon for teams to make sense conceptually, but end up falling short. I think it’s clear that they mutually benefited from each other’s skill sets.

For those who pay attention to it, he ranked 56th in RPOY shares.

[Clyde Frazier]

Looking at lanier, the divide for me is clearly durability. Lanier played in at least 76 games per season his first 5 seasons, yet missed nearly 20 games per season over the next 6. A little too glaring when looking at hayes the ironman. I’m certainly impressed with his overall production, though during his prime.

Just thinking out loud, guys with elite ~5 year stretches who i loved to watch play:

- Penny
- King
- Hill
- Mullin

These guys make me wish this was a peaks project… (or that maybe I should’ve decided to stress longevity a touch less, heh)

[Quotatious]

Looking at lanier, the divide for me is clearly durability. Lanier played in at least 76 games per season his first 5 seasons, yet missed nearly 20 games per season over the next 6. A little too glaring when looking at hayes the ironman. I’m certainly impressed with his overall production, though during his prime.

Lanier is the next guy on my list, but yeah, Hayes has a clear longevity edge over him (I think their primes are very comparable - one brings exactly what the other lacks - Lanier brings efficient scoring, but mediocre defense, Hayes great defense, but mediocre scoring efficiency - still, I prefer my bigman to be an elite defender, so I'm leaning towards Hayes even for prime).

Just thinking out loud, guys with elite ~5 year stretches who i loved to watch play:

- Penny
- King
- Hill
- Mullin

These guys make me wish this was a peaks project… (or that maybe I should’ve decided to stress longevity a touch less, heh)

Penny was amazing at his peak, but he didn't even have an elite 5-year strech. He was elite for less than 3 full seasons (95-97).

I'd definitely add Sidney Moncrief to the list (between 82 and 86, he was IMO the second best guard in the NBA after Magic, and IMO slightly ahead of Isiah). Terrific two way player.

Moncrief's teammate Marques Johnson is interesting, too. Not really a volume scorer, in the same mold as his contemporaries like Wilkins, English, Dantley, Aguirre, King etc., but seems like a more complete all-around player than any of them, maybe except for English.

[Clyde Frazier]

Just thinking out loud, guys with elite ~5 year stretches who i loved to watch play:

- Penny
- King
- Hill
- Mullin

These guys make me wish this was a peaks project… (or that maybe I should’ve decided to stress longevity a touch less, heh)

Penny was amazing at his peak, but he didn't even have an elite 5-year strech. He was elite for less than 3 full seasons (95-97).

I'd definitely add Sidney Moncrief to the list (between 82 and 86, he was IMO the second best guard in the NBA after Magic, and IMO slightly ahead of Isiah). Terrific two way player.

Moncrief's teammate Marques Johnson is interesting, too. Not really a volume scorer, in the same mold as his contemporaries like Wilkins, English, Dantley, Aguirre, King etc., but seems like a more complete all-around player than any of them, maybe except for English.

Yeah, that's why i used the "~" next to 5 yr. You could say the same thing for king when comparing his peak 3 yr stretch to his prime. He was on another level completely. Good call on moncrief and marques. I'll have to look into their careers further. They also make me think of pressey.

[Quotatious]

Yeah, that's why i used the "~" next to 5 yr. You could say the same thing for king when comparing his peak 3 yr stretch to his prime. He was on another level completely

Oh, okay, makes sense.

They also make me think of pressey.

Pressey was a good player, pretty unique, but IMO he wasn't even better than someone like Lamar Odom. I'd definitely look at Terry Cummings before him, as far as those mid 80s Bucks teams.

[Moonbeam]

I just wanted to put out a feeler for Bob Cousy. I certainly feel he belongs in the discussion at this point. So here are some details....

Here is the overall snap-shot of Cousy’s career:
Extended Prime Cousy (‘52-’61)--697 rs games
Estimated Per 100 Possessions (rs): 21.9 pts, 6.1 reb, 8.8 ast @ 44.9% TS% (-0.4% to league)
PER 20.1, .139 WS/48 in 37.4 mpg
Estimated Per 100 Possessions (playoffs): 20.3 pts, 5.5 reb, 8.8 ast @ 43.5% TS%
PER 18.0, .121 WS/48 in 40.7 mpg
Career rs WS: 91.1
Career playoff WS: 9.1

6-Time NBA Champion (at least 3 as the 2nd-best/most important player, never less than the 4th-best player)
13-Time All-Star
10-Time All-NBA 1st Team
2-Time All-NBA 2nd Team
1-Time league MVP (‘57, ahead of Bob Pettit)
#36 All-Time in MVP Award Shares
Seven times he factored into the MVP voting, never lower than 8th (four times in the top 4)
#33 All-Time in RealGM RPoY shares

The guy was still a presence to be reckoned with late in his career. At age 34---in a league that was becoming integrated and had quite a few athletic stars (Russell, Wilt, West, Oscar, Baylor, Pettit, as well as Bellamy, Wilkens, etc)---he still avg 13.2, 2.5, and 6.8 for the best team in the land; in his final game as a Celtic (game 6 of the finals), despite sprained ankle late in game, came up with 18 pts while helping to hold Frank Selvy and Dick Barnett to a combined 15 pts.

He led THREE #1 offenses ('53-'55), this was before he was joined by Russell and Sam Jones.

I know he's criticized for his inefficient shooting, though I think it's sometimes overstated. For instance, he was actually ABOVE league average ts% for SIX of his thirteen full seasons (by an avg of +1.0%, once by as much as +2.5%). As noted above, during his prime (which extends into the 60's), he was just barely below league avg overall (-0.4%), and is just -1.0% ts for his whole career. Where shooting efficiency is concerned that's not as bad as Hayes (-2.5%) or Isiah Thomas (-2.1%), and is a couple hundredths of a percent better than Iverson.

His popularity and influence on ball-handling trends is no mere trifle, either (imo).

Not saying Cousy is my vote for this spot (though I’m considering him), but it certainly seems he ought to be in the discussion by this time; so I'm looking to start that up.

Cousy is definitely a huge name - probably the biggest that has yet to get the nod here, but is he better than Paul Arizin or Sam Jones?

A cursory glance at their metrics seems to give both Arizin and Jones an edge:

WS/48:

Arizin: 0.183 (missing his first season, which would likely raise his career mark)
Jones: 0.182
Cousy: 0.139 (missing his first season, which might drop his career mark)

PER:

Cousy: 19.8 (missing his first season)
Arizin: 19.7 (missing his first season)
Jones: 18.7

Score+:

Arizin: 2.337
Jones: 0.983
Cousy: -0.444

PosScore+:

Arizin: 2.072
Jones: 1.272
Cousy: 0.185

TeamScore+:

Arizin: 2.216
Jones: 1.533
Cousy: -0.630

Total WS:

Arizin: 108.8
Jones: 92.3
Cousy: 91.1

Postseason WS/48:

Arizin: 0.183 (missing his first season in which he posted 0.5 WS in only 2 games on 0.605 TS)
Jones: 0.157
Cousy: 0.109 (missing his first season in which he posted -0.3 WS in 2 games on 0.296 TS)

Postseason PER:

Arizin: 20.3 (missing his first season)
Jones: 17.5
Cousy: 17.4 (missing his first season)

Postseason Total WS:

Jones: 15.2
Cousy: 9.1
Arizin: 7.4

Here are per 100 possession regular season numbers for these three:

Cousy: 21.75 PTS, 5.91 REB, 9.06 AST
Jones: 24.28 PTS, 6.78 REB, 3.48 AST
Arizin: 25.20 PTS, 9.13 REB, 2.54 AST

It seems that Cousy's edge in assists is his biggest calling card on offense. How do these guys compare on the defensive end?