penbeast0 wrote:Worthy wins, gotta run, anyone who wants to can post the next thread and I'll sticky it and stuff when I get home.
Main choice for me is between Marion and Brand. But I'll keep looking at it.
Moderators: PaulieWal, Doctor MJ, Clyde Frazier, penbeast0, trex_8063
penbeast0 wrote:Worthy wins, gotta run, anyone who wants to can post the next thread and I'll sticky it and stuff when I get home.
RebelWithACause wrote:Why for example would someone chose Big Ben over Rasheed Wallace, if the latter is much superior on offense and has better longevity?!
Owly wrote:SinceGatlingWasARookie wrote:trex_8063 wrote:
I do think Bobby Jones could have had a bigger role (that is: play more minutes) for lesser teams, though probably the degree to which he can take on a larger role is not equal to the increase potential we see from Worthy.
Look at the Nuggets 1978 playoffs, who is Bo Ellis and why is he getting any minutes at power forward? LaGarde and Ellis back up Issel but one of Ellis or Issel is getting minutes at power forward. I understand that Hillman had some talent. Anthony Roberts is playing 31 minutes per game at SF. Bobby Jones is playing 30 minutes a game at pF and SF.
Why did Bobby Jones only play 30 minutes per game in the 1978 playoffs?
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/DEN/1978.html
At what might have been Jone's peak in 1976-77 it is more understandable that Jones is only playing minutes per game in the playoffs because Marvin Webster and Paul Silas are on that team. With the 76ers the team had a deep front court.
Jones appears to be a guy a coach would want to play more minutes but there might be some reason to not play Jones more minutes. Maybe Jones played an exhausting style of basketball.
I've tended to operate on the assumption that it was his medical conditions (asthma, heart condition, epilepsy) that led to the minutes limitation, though I don't know that that's been explicitly stated anywhere.
Quotatious wrote:Fair points, but I think that many people just like Ben's super elite (top 10 all-time) defense and rebounding, more than Sheed's "just" very good (sometimes even elite, but not elite in the all-time sense, like Ben) defense, good scoring/spacing, but below average rebounding and unimpressive passing.
RSCD3_ wrote:I'm going to post the best remaining candidates by win shares
22. Dan Issel 157.82
35. Walt Bellamy 130.05
40. Shawn Marion 124.40
42. Chauncey Billups 120.78
44. Buck Williams 120.09
46. Horace Grant 118.23
47. Dominque Wilkins 117.47
48. Chet Walker 117.35
49. Bob Lanier 117.11
53. Bailey Howell 114.82
56. Jack Sikma
Can anyone give me a short run down of the bolded guys and what made then great and what would limit them now
trex_8063 wrote:A word on Dan Issel.....
Seems more than appropriate that we be discussing him by this point, given for instance his place on the all-time leaderboard in WS (which RSCD3_ had presented previously):Spoiler:
Issel was, in general so far as I can tell, pretty consistently decisive with the ball. Aside from the low-post tendencies mentioned above, if he caught the ball 16 ft from the hoop and was open, the shot’s going up (pretty good mid-range shooter, btw). When he did decide to put it on the floor, it was usually something quick, non-flashy, and to-the-point. For instance, he’d maybe catch a pass 17 ft from the hoop, immediately make like he’s going to shoot, getting his defender to bite just a little, then put it on the floor----just one, maybe two dribbles---on the quickest path to the hoop.
With Issel, there just wasn’t a lot of standing around making multiple shot/pass/jab-step fakes, slow back-down dribbles in the post, or bringing the ball low and doing lots of pump-fakes, etc. He really just didn’t do those things that---while they might be effective for some other players---allow the defense time to get their feet set and start anticipating.
I recall that from Bird’s game, too. I think that tendency toward quick and decisive action was part of what made both of these guys so effectively offensively, despite some physical short-comings. Bird also had a whole myriad of offensive talents that Issel didn’t, but I digress….
But that’s largely what I saw from Issel on offense. A quick (3-4 minute) but decent look at his offensive game can be seen here:
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kaMmJNJLWcg[/youtube]
Couple glimpses of Bobby Jones in there, too, fwiw.
At any rate, I think Issel has a pretty hefty chunk of career value to brag about (as evidenced by his standing in WS, perhaps), and I could happily get behind him for this spot if others had the will. I likely will be casting first ballots for him before long.
Moonbeam wrote:With Worthy in, it's wide open again for me. My top candidates from my "pre"-list appear to be Neil Johnson, Bill Walton, Joe Dumars, Ben Wallace, and Maurice Cheeks. Only one of these guys is getting any buzz at the moment. Will think about this a bit.
penbeast0 wrote:trex_8063 wrote:A word on Dan Issel.....
Seems more than appropriate that we be discussing him by this point, given for instance his place on the all-time leaderboard in WS (which RSCD3_ had presented previously):Spoiler:
Issel was, in general so far as I can tell, pretty consistently decisive with the ball. Aside from the low-post tendencies mentioned above, if he caught the ball 16 ft from the hoop and was open, the shot’s going up (pretty good mid-range shooter, btw). When he did decide to put it on the floor, it was usually something quick, non-flashy, and to-the-point. For instance, he’d maybe catch a pass 17 ft from the hoop, immediately make like he’s going to shoot, getting his defender to bite just a little, then put it on the floor----just one, maybe two dribbles---on the quickest path to the hoop.
With Issel, there just wasn’t a lot of standing around making multiple shot/pass/jab-step fakes, slow back-down dribbles in the post, or bringing the ball low and doing lots of pump-fakes, etc. He really just didn’t do those things that---while they might be effective for some other players---allow the defense time to get their feet set and start anticipating.
I recall that from Bird’s game, too. I think that tendency toward quick and decisive action was part of what made both of these guys so effectively offensively, despite some physical short-comings. Bird also had a whole myriad of offensive talents that Issel didn’t, but I digress….
But that’s largely what I saw from Issel on offense. A quick (3-4 minute) but decent look at his offensive game can be seen here:
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kaMmJNJLWcg[/youtube]
Couple glimpses of Bobby Jones in there, too, fwiw.
At any rate, I think Issel has a pretty hefty chunk of career value to brag about (as evidenced by his standing in WS, perhaps), and I could happily get behind him for this spot if others had the will. I likely will be casting first ballots for him before long.
That decisiveness is typical of a Doug Moe team. He had a rule that he drilled in to his players. You have 3 seconds to either attack the basket, get off a shot, or pass the ball; if you screwed around dribbling the ball sideways looking for an opening, you were benched (ask Mike Evans). One reason his teams were so high scoring; no Rob Strickland or Anthony Mason pounding the ball in place for half the shot clock.