RealGM Top 100 List #77

[penbeast0]

PG: Tony Parker and Mookie Blaylock are the two I'm looking at. Parker for how much he contributed to the greatest run of this century so far; Blaylock for his defense and 3 point shooting (a skill much underestimated in his day)

Forwards: Marques Johnson and Chris Mullin would be the main scorers; maybe Carmelo Anthony though between his season of discontent in Denver and his playoff numbers, I'd have to be persuaded. Defensive stars would include Shawn Marion and Rasheed Wallace with my clear preference for Marion.


Bigs: Mel Daniels has 2 MVPs and 3 rings, albeit in a weaker league; similarly Neil Johnston has the best raw numbers in an even weaker league than Daniels. Amare Stoudamire and Jerry Lucas bring great numbers but defensive questions (Johnston is defensively questionable too); Ben Wallace is the best defender; Bill Walton has the highest peak (though that's it for true career value -- 1 year and 1 year as a reserve role player).

There are a lot of other good players but as we are into the last quarter, that's my short list.

I would rather have had peak Shawn Marion than either Tony Parker, Rasheed Wallace, Carmelo, Chris Webber, or Amare; Ben Wallace it would depend on the team but I would guess Marion for most talented teams due to his versatility. Marion's defense is very valuable (despite having no all-D teams) and his off ball attacking is as good as any player I've seen which makes up for his lesser on ball skills. Add outstanding rebounding for a 3 and the ability to guard 1-4 and he's a great asset.

Chris Mullin v. Marques Johnson; Mel Daniels v. Neil Johnston; Tony Parker v. Mookie Blaylock; Jerry Lucas v. Chris Webber; those are the other comps I am looking at and would love feedback on.

Willing to move off the pick but for now, vote Shawn Marion

[Joao Saraiva]

I'm not casting a vote early this time. I'll wait and see who is the player that gets more attention here: Bill Walton, Tony Parker or Ben Wallace. I think they're the most deserving.

[trex_8063]

Will likely vote either Chris Webber or Tony Parker again for this spot, though I could get behind Dan Issel, or perhaps Chris Bosh or Hal Greer, too, if the support was there. Will be back with more later.

[SactoKingsFan]

I'll probably stick with Webber until he gets in unless Parker or maybe Marion start gaining more traction.

My previous Webber post:

Spoiler:

Although Chris Webber is often criticized for maturity issues during his pre-Sacto years, poor durability, falling in love with his elbow jumper and avoiding contact, he was still a legit MVP candidate, a very talented player with a versatile offensive skill-set and a solid/underrated defender. I think Webber's peak, prime and overall skill-set are enough to make him one of the leading top 70-75 candidates, and his issues at this point in the project don't look so bad since all the remaining candidates have significant weaknesses.

94 ROY
5x All-NBA (1x 1st, 3x 2nd, 1x 3rd)
5x All-Star
5x Top 10 in MVP voting

10 Year Prime (94-03):
22.1 PER, .526 TS%, 14.7 TRB%, 20.4 AST%, 72.3 WS, .152 WS/48, 106 ORtg, 100 DRtg

10 Year Prime (94-03) Per 100:
29.2 PTS, 13.5 TRB, 5.8 AST, 2 STL, 2.2 BLK, 3.9 TOV

GOAT level passing big:

Webber was capable of making all the passes and you could run the offense through him without missing a beat. His 20.2 career AST% is exceptional for a big. The only other PF/C with a career AST% >= 20 is Alvan Adams.

1 of only 10 players with 17,000 PTS, 8000 REB, 3500 AST and a career PER above 20:


The other 9 players with at least 17,000 PTS, 8000 REB, 3500 AST and a career PER >=20 are Kareem, Wilt, Karl Malone, Duncan, KG, Dr J, Barkley, Bird and Baylor. Webber obviously doesn't belong in the same class as any of these legends, but I think it at least shows how talented and skilled he was.

Vote: Chris Webber

[trex_8063]

Chris Webber is.......

*1 of only 5 players to ever average more than 20 pts, 10 reb, and 5 ast in the same season for a team that won 55+ games. The others are Wilt, Legend, Barkley, Baylor (3 of the other 4 are top 20 all-time players, the other is a top 35 guy--->and he's obviously only qualifying due to pace-inflated numbers).

**1 of only 8 players to ever average more than 24 pts, 10 reb, 4.5 ast on >/= 54.0% ts in the same season, for a team that won 55+ games. The others are Wilt, Kareem, Larry, Garnett, Barkley, Baylor, DRob (6 of the other 7 are top 20 guys, the other top 35).

***1 of 5 players to ever average more than 25 pts, 11 reb, and 4 ast in the same season for a team that won 55+ games. The others are Wilt, Kareem, Larry, Barkley (all top 20 players).

****1 of only 4 players to---within the same season---A) average >10 reb, B) >4.5 ast, C) >1.4 blk, while D) also qualifying for the steals leaderboard and E) also shooting >/= 53.0% ts.....all for a team that won 55+ games. The others are Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Kevin Garnett, and David Robinson (all consensus top 20 guys).


His combined RAPM data looks better than that of Pau Gasol (voted in at #53), and is pretty similar in quality to the likes of Ben Wallace, Tony Parker, and Kevin Durant (slightly better than Parker and Durant, slightly lesser to Wallace).


Additionally, I wanted to look into a statement saying that the Kings didn't miss a beat when Webber was injured. So here's what I found....

I'll start with the general observations:
‘98 Kings-->27-55 (-5.83 SRS)
‘99 Kings--->27-23 (-0.89 SRS): Peja, Webber, Divac, Jason Williams, and Vernon Maxwell added. Mitch Richmond, Billy Owens, Anthony Johnson, Olden Polynice, and Otis Thorpe lost. New coach (Adelman), too.
‘00--->44-38 (+3.04 SRS). Nick Anderson added. Scott Pollard has become principle role player. Vernon Maxwell gone.
‘01--->55-27 (+6.07 SRS). Doug Christie and role players Bobby Jackson and Hedo Turkoglu added. Corliss Williamson gone (and aging Nick Anderson marginalized).
‘02--->61-21 (+7.61 SRS). Jason Williams gone, Mike Bibby added. Webber misses 28 games.
‘03--->59-23 (+6.68 SRS). Role players Jim Jackson and Keon Clark added.
‘04--->55-27 (+5.41 SRS). Webber misses 59 games; Hedo Turkoglu and Scott Pollard gone. Brad Miller added, along with role player Anthony Peeler. Peja’s peak year, fwiw.
‘05--->50-32 (+2.56 SRS). Vlade retires. Webber and Doug Christie leave near All-Star break. Brad Miller misses 26 games. Role player Maurice Evans added. Cuttino Mobley obtained mid-season, along with role players Kenny Thomas and Brian Skinner.
‘06--->44-38 (+1.61 SRS). Bobby Jackson gone. Peja leaves mid-season. Shareef Abdur-Rahim, Bonzi Wells, Kevin Martin, and Jason Hart added. Metta added mid-season.

A look at with/without Webber records, as well as some other data:
‘94-->47-29 (.618) with, 3-3 (.500) w/o
‘95-->11-43 (.204) with, 10-18 (.357) w/o
‘96--> 9-6 (.600) with, 30-37 (.448) w/o
‘97--> 40-32 (.556) with, 4-6 (.400) w/o
‘98-->39-32 (.549) with, 3-8 (.273) w/o
‘99-->22-20 (.524) with, 5-3 (.625) w/o
‘00-->41-34 (.547) with, 3-4 (.429) w/o
‘01-->48-22 (.686) with, 7-5 (.583) w/o
‘02-->42-12 (.778) with, 19-9 (.679) w/o
‘03-->49-18 (.731) with, 10-5 (.667) w/o
‘04-->11-12 (.478) with, 44-15 (.746) w/o
‘05--> 34-20 (.630) prior to trade (Webber in 46 of 54 games), 16-12 (.571) after trade

I investigated the more elaborate details regarding his best years (‘00 thru ‘02).
In ‘00 (I’m envisioning that old Conan O’Brien skit ...”in the year 2000….”:)), 7 missed rs games:
SRS
With Webber: +3.16
Without Webber: +1.79

ORtg
With Webber: 105.1
Without Webber: 104.2

DRtg
With Webber: 102.0
Without Webber: 103.5

ORtg/DRtg gap
With Webber: +3.1
Without Webber: +0.7


In ‘01 (12 missed games)....
SRS
With Webber: +6.36
Without Webber: +4.39

ORtg
With Webber: 105.2
Without Webber: 108.0

DRtg
With Webber: 99.1
Without Webber: 102.8

ORtg/DRtg gap
With Webber: +6.1
Without Webber: +5.3

And finally the ‘02 season where Webber missed 28 games. Again, they were 42-12 (.778) with him and 19-9 (.678) without him (that’s the difference between being the #1 seed and the #4 seed in the West that year). Beyond that…
SRS
With Webber: +7.92
Without Webber: +7.01

ORtg
With Webber: 110.2
Without Webber: 106.6

DRtg
With Webber: 101.5
Without Webber: 100.3

ORtg/DRtg gap
With Webber: +8.7
Without Webber: +6.3

So in '00 the Kings were slightly better both offensively and defensively with Webber. In '01 they were worse offensively with Webber, but significantly better defensively. In '02 they were slightly worse defensively with Webber, but significantly better offensively. But in all instances they were better with Webber by all general measures I looked at: win%, SRS (anywhere from 0.91 to 1.97 better), and ORtg/DRtg gap (0.8 to 2.4 better).

I didn't get this elaborate with other years because frankly it's time-consuming to do so; and based on the record improvements shown above, I'd expect to find similar results in other years of his prime (except for '95 and '04, and maybe small sample year '99).

These improvements aren't as profound as we've seen with other stars I've similarly investigated, but those I'm referring to were all voted in more than 20 places ago.

Vote: Chris Webber.

[ronnymac2]

Vote: Ben Wallace

He lead a top-tier defense every year between 2001 and 2007. Unique combination of pick-n-roll coverage, shot-blocking, defensive rebounding, steals, and low fouls. The dude was truly a dominant defensive force.

He has a few decent offensive seasons as well if you value his activity on the offensive glass, actual offensive rebounds, solid passing, and solid field goal percentage (albeit on low volume). I mean, Detroit had a top-5 offense in 2006 with Big Ben starting 82 games. He had a respectable 112 individual ORTG + elite motor on the offensive glass which means you basically had to faceguard him to keep him from creating extra possessions. 1.9 assists per game, too. He was pretty good passing after, say, Rip Hamilton came off Wallace's screen, received the ball, quickly dumped it to Wallace, and then Wallace could read whether to pass back to Rip or to a cutter coming down the lane after the defense has committed to stop Wallace's roll.

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

Should Ben Wallace be ahead of Bill Walton?
Wallace had the longer career. Walton brought more offense.
Was peak Wallace's defense better than peak Walton's defense?

[SactoKingsFan]

Should Ben Wallace be ahead of Bill Walton?
Wallace had the longer career. Walton brought more offense.
Was peak Wallace's defense better than peak Walton's defense?

Ben Wallace provides more career value due to his huge edge in durability and longevity. I won't be voting for Walton since you only get two prime seasons (123 games), one elite role player season and < 15,000 RS + PS mins. Even with his ATG peak and skill set, I don't think it's enough to crack the top 100.

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

I am not saying that VORP is a good stat or even saying that I really understand it, but here is a list:
Basketball Reference's VORP stat / Value Over Replacement Player
26 Shawn Marion
29 Ben Wallace
31 Chris Webber
32 Vlade Divac
36 Eddie Jones
37 Horace Grant
38 Manu Ginobili
39 Elton Brand
45 Jack Sikma


Some point guards
50 Mookie Blaylock
64 Terry Porter
67 Tim Hardaway
70 Baron Davis
113 Tony Parker
These are career stats and they don't include players before the mid 1970s.

[Joao Saraiva]

My vote goes to Ben Wallace.

I said last thread I'd vote for him now if Worthy won, and he did. I'm also glad I'm not the 1st guy voting for Wallace here.

Accodales:
- 4 time all-star;
- 4 times defensive player of the year;
- 5 times 1st defensive team;
- 1 time in the 2nd defensive team;
- 3 times All-NBA 2nd team;
- 2 times All-NBA 3rd team;
- Top 10 in MVP votes 3 times in his career.

Stats:
- Lead the league in RPG twice (lead twice on total offensive boards and once on total defensive boards);
- 5 times top 3 in RPG;
- Top 10 in steals twice;
- Lead the league once in BPG;
- Top ten in BPG in 7 seasons;
- Lead the league in DRTG 3 times;
- Lead the league in defensive win shares 4 times.

4 times DPOY is the most in the NBA, so that alone should be a key factor for Ben Wallace.
His impact was tremendous and he was part of a great Pistons team that achieved two NBA finals and beat the Lakers in 04 (4-1). While he was the last option in the starting 5 on offense, Ben Wallace did have a case for NBA finals MVP too in 04. How incredible is that?

He's also one of those player you could count on in playoff time. His stats look even more impressive. If that was a boost for Worthy, it should be a boost too for Ben Wallace.

I'm willing to change my vote to Bill Walton if some guys give him traction here. They're my two choices for this spot.

[penbeast0]

Should Ben Wallace be in before Mel Daniels? On the downside, Mel only played 8 years + 11 games (6 year prime) and the ABA of his prime was a weak league, though probably stronger than the NBA of Neil Johnston's time. He was an inside scorer after his first (inefficient) year because his coach basically told him, if you shoot from beyond 10 feet, you're running laps the next day. On the upside:

Led the league in rebounds 3 times (7th all-time in career reb%, ABA and NBA combined)
Scored over 20 ppg each of those 3 years
7 time All-Star (even after he started his decline)
4 time 1st team All-ABA (basically every year until Artis Gilmore came into the league)
Won 3 championships, 2 as clearly the best player
Won 2 MVPs (every other multiple MVP winner is long since voted in)

Gives you strong defense though not the shotblocking of Ben Wallace, stronger rebounding, and good inside scoring, plus great leadership.

[penbeast0]

In a similar vein, what is the case for Chris Webber over Jerry Lucas?

Lucas didn't score as much but was more efficient . . . in a less efficient league. He also had better range than Webber, able to take his man further out and probably today would be a 3 point threat.

Lucas was a monster rebounder, after Bob Pettit retired, possibly the best in the league. We don't have reb rate for his prime, but using a substitute method for it, his rebound rate was up close to 20 for most of a decade.

Lucas was an extremely smart player and good passer; not as impressive as Webber but then he played his prime with Oscar Robertson dominating the ball. His post prime years with the Knicks, he took over for Willis Reed and fit in with one of the great ball movement teams of all times.

Neither played particularly good defense; Webber was better because of his shot blocking although he had a tendency to go for the highlight play instead of the smart play where Lucas was an analytics player long before that became popular.

In a modern offense, Lucas is probably the more valuable as a stretch 4 (which minimizes his defensive weakness a bit too); in the offense of his day, Lucas would have been the more valuable because of his rebounding and efficiency. And, of course, Lucas was a better locker room guy (not a great leader being somewhat of a rain man type) and didn't have the choking in the clutch issues.

[Quotatious]

I didn't vote in the previous thread because I really wasn't sure who I should go with (RebelWithACause's posts about Rasheed made me reconsider the Sheed vs Ben comparison, and now I feel like Sheed deserves to be ranked over Ben), but I'll vote for Elton Brand here.

I also considered voting for Bill Walton (as I've said before, I realize it would be inconsistent, considering that I usually put a lot of emphasis on longevity, but Walton's peak was amazing, so far ahead of everyone else at this point, that I said to myself - "when I won't be able to decide who I should vote for, I'll make an exception and vote for Walton", but Elton Brand's peak is IMO the second highest after Walton, and he had a much longer prime).

So - what was that Brand brought to the table, that makes him my top candidate here? He was basically a really good (at his peak, even great) all-around player who didn't have any obvious weaknesses in his game. He had a nice 8-year prime, averaged 20.3 points (55.8% TS), 10.2 rebounds (15.5% TRB), 2.7 assists (13.6% AST), with 2.5 turnovers (12.2% TOV), and his defense normally hovered from above average to very good - also averaged 2.1 blocks, 4.0% BLK, but he was also a good 1 on 1 defender because of his great lower body strength, wide body and long arms).

His advanced numbers were very good, too - 22.7 PER, 16.8 WS/48, 4.0 BPM, and usually good RAPM ratings.

He also had three more solid seasons in Philly (especially the 2010-11 season, when he put up borderline All-Star numbers).

One thing that Brand definitely lacks is playoff success - he played only 12 games in the postseason during his prime, but he played very well - that was in his best season, in '06. If the 2005-06 season wasn't so stacked in terms of the top level talent, Brand would've been a top 3/5 player in the league. 25/10/2.5 over 26 PER, 23 WS/48, 5.5 BPM. 5.9 VORP, 58% TS - that's a superstar right there, IMO a top 10 peak of all-time at the power forward position (Duncan, Garnett, Nowitzki, Malone, Barkley, Pettit - these are the only guys who were clearly better than him - I can see a good case for Brand over anyone else, even McHale).

Anyway, Brand's lack of playoff success (or rather, playoff appearances) wasn't his fault. He just played on weak teams during his prime, like many other stars of the 2000s (KG, Pierce, T-Mac, Carter would be the most notable examples, as far as the early/mid 2000s players - Brand is in the same category).

Hoping to see Owly vote for Brand, as well (he supported him even in the 60-70 range, IIRC).

BTW - great job defending Webber here, trex. I may not be as high on C-Webb as you are, but the way you're trying to provide good arguments for him is admirable.

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

List of the remaining career high volume efficient scorers

This list is about who scored the most points per game efficiently ( ts% over 55 ).



24: Mitch Richmond
26: Dan Issell
27: Amare Stoudemire
28: Walt Bellamy
29: Marques Johnson
32: Kiki Vandeweghe
34: Chris Bosh
35: Brad Daugherty
36: Michael Redd
38: Walter Davis
42: Glen Rice
44: Chris Mullin
45: Rolando Blackmon
49: Deron Williams
50: Kelly Tripuka


54: Tony Parker

55: Peja Stojakovic
57: Carlos Boozer
58: Larry Johnson
59: Joe Dumars
60: Correy Maggette
61: Orlando Woolridge
62: Dale Ellis
64: Paul Westphal
66: David Lee
67: Mark Price
68: Jason Terry
69: Rashard Lewis
70: Ricky Pierce

[Owly]

It was either Brand or Marion for me here. Both are high on career added value, but I think Brand's peak is higher and he might add slightly more value overall.

On WS/48-PER pythagorean ranking- ranking only Amar'e, Neil Johnston, Walt Bellamy and Terrell Brandon still on the board have a higher peak (Brandon has major longevity issues, the rest have era/D/longevity/winning issues).

Only Johnston has more PER Wins Above Good (like EWA, a PER based wins metric but instead of a baseline of somewhere around 12, only counting positive seasons above 17.9 PER). Brand is also towards the top end of possible contenders for WS Wins Above Good (above .144) though Marion is one of those above him. (for the rankings see spoilers - back from thread 64)

Spoiler:

My Wins Above Good measure (as ever not taking away for time below but only counting minutes and play above the threshold) for the RS for those mentioned in my previous post

in both measures Cousy is missing his rookie season (minutes not recorded, neither is PER estimates)

EWA (PER) based Wins Above Good (Where Good = 17.9 PER)

Neil Johnston 62.31428
Elton Brand 56.76358
Amar'e Stoudemire 53.01318
Bob McAdoo 49.68881
Walt Bellamy 47.441
Grant Hill 42.28965
Shawn Marion 37.39274
Larry Nance 33.13085
Shawn Kemp 32.23035
Marques Johnson 31.59547
Bob Cousy 29.94303
Terrell Brandon 26.5204
Bernard King 24.73716
Bailey Howell 23.32214
Sidney Moncrief 18.29985
Bill Walton 15.57692
Jack Sikma 12.07736
Sam Jones 10.72607
Rasheed Wallace 8.006766
Vlade Divac 6.38592
Wes Unseld 0.0602488
Dennis Rodman 0

the same with win shares above good (.144 WS/48)

Neil Johnston 37.50535
Bailey Howell 26.02558
Sidney Moncrief 23.0294
Walt Bellamy 20.93269
Sam Jones 19.9995
Amar'e Stoudemire 18.79104
Larry Nance 18.67998
Bob McAdoo 18.40183
Shawn Marion 18.08771
Elton Brand 17.67381
Marques Johnson 16.40483
Shawn Kemp 15.98746
Grant Hill 11.53165
Jack Sikma 10.18433
Wes Unseld 10.12033
Terrell Brandon 8.899083
Dennis Rodman 8.412583
Rasheed Wallace 6.774042
Bill Walton 6.547875
Bernard King 6.473833
Vlade Divac 3.322479
Bob Cousy 3.230292

Apart from Johnston, the two different metrics tend to differ substantially on who they really rate.

Am now leaning Johnston. Boxscore wise he obviously has a very strong peak, and maintained that level to get the significant Wins Above Good measures above. The issues are team performance and era. Team performance is perhaps the biggie (era obviously is a "problem" but with Arizin in already, that alone probably doesn't stop someone with his numbers --and all-NBA accolades-- at this point). I tend to take individual production at face value but the team stuff probably has to be looked at here. A sypathetic view might be that the team became bad when Arizin and Phillip went (and they weren't great at Arizin's boxscore peak) and they got good when Arizin returned and Gola arrived, and in the meantime he had a terrible supporting cast (maybe it's arguable that in the smaller league, in it's infancy smaller differences mattered more, and/or it was more possible, through less complex scouting, to fall off the pack with inferior role players). The less sympathetic view would be that he was an awful defender, that the Philly star system led to epic individual numbers (the thing is, when there's no shot clock, it's hard to figure how he can be said to be causing teammates to shoot poorly except through skill atrophy) and that his numbers aren't that far ahead of other 50s centers like Groza, Macauley, Foust and Lovellette. I tend to say teammates lousy free throw shooting tends to be a point in favour of the sympathetic interpretation (teammates that can't shoot) but I guess it could fit with atrophy too. Hmmm.

My ranking combination of faux-EWA and Win Shares has Marion and Brand as the top 2, with Marion ahead (but the faux-EWA that I used basically adds on playoffs (and with an apparently high weighting), so it's basically punishing Brand for his teammates.

Here's some reasoning I had for him at 66

After all that, and strong looks at Marion and Nance, I think I'll vote Elton Brand. On the one hand I know how that sounds (at best 4th best player at position within era) and I'm tempted to pick a Moncrief or Sharman (the best 2s to play primarily in the 50s and 80s respectively). But I think he was as good as his numbers. And in his prime ('02-'07, with '03 a slight downward outlier, probably due to injury) he averaged a PER of 23.5 and .188 WS/48. The one chance he got to play in the playoffs in that span he was very effective. And his Win Shares might be slightly mean on him in terms of him being stuck on crummy teams (so he gets punished in DWS despite a solid or better reputation on D). His usage for that span (24.1%) probably tabs him as a second option on a good team and I think (largely guessing here) he could probably pretty much do that same job with similar numbers on said good team.

I'm willing to listen to arguments and there's guys I want to vote for in the discussion, but looking at it, Brand might quietly have amassed a career that deserves this spot (or around here).

Without being outstanding at any one thing, I think Brand was very consistently very good throughout his prime.

[trex_8063]

Should Ben Wallace be in before Mel Daniels? On the downside, Mel only played 8 years + 11 games (6 year prime) and the ABA of his prime was a weak league, though probably stronger than the NBA of Neil Johnston's time.

Probably; although speaking for myself I find the gap between the NBA of the 50's and the ABA of '68-'74 overall to be......somewhat less than large.
Additionally, although Daniels has two ABA MVP's, I'm skeptical he ever dominated that league to the same degree that Johnston did the NBA (statistically, it doesn't even appear close).

In a similar vein, what is the case for Chris Webber over Jerry Lucas?

I used to be pretty high on Jerry Lucas, but my opinion of him has fallen over time. He seems somewhat like the Kevin Love of his time. Which isn't to say that that necessarily isn't enough to place him ahead of Webber, but it's pretty debatable (particularly considering difference in strength of eras).

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

I am fairly negative towards the 1960s NBA but Lucas looked to me like he would be a good player in the current. NBA. I didn't like the defense being played against Lucas in the 2 games I saw. I didn't feel like his outside shot was being contested as well as it should have been. I didn't see Lucas driving into a packed in defense so I didn't think he should be given room to shoot out of the fear of his drive. Lucas hit some shots with a hand in his face but some shots seemed too uncontested.

I am not sure that every good outside shooter automatically becomes a good 3 point shooter if playing with a 3 point shot. In general the good young outside shooter of the late 1970s did not become good 3 point shooters within a few years of the 3 point shot becoming part of the game. Early 1980s NBA coaches may not have like the 3 point shot so perhaps players were not in a hurry to improve their 3 point shooting after the 3 point shot became part of the game. The 1990s were strange in that there were many players that hit 3s at a decent rate while being poor mid range shooters.

While I think Lucas would be a good player today I think he would not be as efficient a scorer in the current game unless he worked well inside more against the more spread out defenses of the current game.

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

...

[penbeast0]

My problem with Johnston is (a) his defensive rep from what I've read wasn't good and (b) the Warriors seemed just fine without him while with him and not Arizin, they were awful. His numbers are impressive and while I agree that the early ABA was clearly behind the early 70s NBA, I think it was ahead of the 50s NBA. By 72-74, it was close enough that if Kareem had signed with the ABA instead of the NBA, it would have been roughly even in talent distribution; Kareem was clearly the best player in either league though. By 75, the NBA had expanded enough that even with Kareem (and he wasn't at his best those years), the talent was pretty even. But, for the years Daniels was the best player in the league, it was clearly an inferior league. So, I don't take him here; just wanted to put his name out there as being on a similar level as Ben Wallace; and while I don't like bigs with mediocre defense, I take Lucas over Issel, Webber, or Amare who are the other top high offense/mediocre defense bigs.

Pretty shaky on Marion though, mainly due to his playoffs which were inconsistent at best But, it looks like the runoff this time is Webber (talk about shaky in the clutch!) and Ben Wallace (you don't even want him to touch the ball anywhere in the last 2 minutes).

I realize that Webber was better in Sacramento (though still a bonehead in the clutch), but having put up with him in Washington and been living in San Francisco in his year there, there are too many negatives for me to put Webber over someone who, while extremely limited, seemed to maximize his value to his team. Vote BEN WALLACE.

Elton Brand -- Quotatious
Ben Wallace -- Joao Saraiva, ronnymac2, penbeast0
Chris Webber -- trex_8063, SactoKingsFan

[RayBan-Sematra]

VOTE : Big Ben
This guy was a real defensive force for many years and he was a guy who knew his strengths and played to them.

Webber had an interesting Peak but even then I felt he was more flash then substance.
His streaky shooting, his unimpressive rebounding and "ok" defense didn't blow me away.
Just not consistent or efficient enough for my liking.
Never had an extended playoff run with a TS% above 52% and his 2nd best extended run was 18.4ppg on .486%TS.

So much talent but he didn't hone it well enough.
Then after his little early 00's Peak his body began to completely break down and he was never a great player again.