RealGM Top 100 List #79 -- Hal Greer or Elton Brand

[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). Hal Greer was a combo guard but his accolades put him in this discussion as well (and he has more accolades than any other guards except maybe Sharman). Tim Hardaway and Mark Price get a mention . . . maybe Penny Hardaway though he never impressed me as much as he did the TV guys of 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. Billy Cunningham, Bob Dandridge, Chet Walker, and Mitch Richmond also come to mind.

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); Bill Walton has the highest peak (though that's it for true career value -- 1 year then failed to stay healthy to the playoffs the next and 1 year as a reserve role player). Other players that have come up in discussion include Rasheed Wallace and Elton Brand.

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

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.

By the boxscore numbers I go for Jerry Lucas or Chris Mullin. By the eye test I go for Mel Daniels or Marques Johnson.

VOTE (but open to persuasion): Mel Daniels. Not as impressive statistically as Marques Johnson (or Jerry Lucas/Chris Webber) but has a strong defensive impact (more of a Moses Malone/Wes Unseld type as he wasn't a great shotblocker), excellent rebounding, good if not great offense, and came across similarly to Alonzo Mourning when you watched him as just a pure warrior type.

[Owly]

Vote: Brand

I buy into Brand's (02-07) prime as a pretty big needle mover. No one aspect is exceptional but the metrics (at least boxscore wise, don't know about others) seem to be concert that through that spell he was having a high level of impact. Because his numbers don't come from any one thing (but generally being above average, and playing good D too) he seems portable to me, too.

For what it's worth he was excellent in his (one) playoff prime run, and it would seem harsh to penalize him for playing on the post-Jordan Bulls and the 2000s Clippers.

[Clyde Frazier]

Vote for #79 - Hal Greer

- 15 year career (all with same franchise)
- 7x all NBA 2nd team
- 1 top 10 MVP finish
- Sixers all time leader in games played, minutes played, FGM, total points

As stated in the last thread, I was looking at greer, cunningham and carmelo. Also compared them to brand and parker. I came away most impressed with greer’s overall body of work. He had marked consistency throughout his career, along with impressive durability and longevity for his time. He played in 79+ games in 10 of his 15 seasons, which spanned from 59-73. He scored on above average efficiency relative to his era, putting up the following #s from 61-70:

22 PPG, 5.6 RPG, 4.4 APG, 45.4% FG, 80.3% FT (6 FTAs per game), 51% TS, .135 WS/48

He performed similarly in the playoffs, playing a major role in the 67 sixers championship run, commonly considered one of the best teams of all time:

27.7 PPG, 5.9 RPG, 5.3 APG, 42.9% FG, 79.7% FT (7.9 FTAs per game), 48.7% TS (league avg that yr 49.3%), .130 WS/48

"I knew Hal when I got there [as the Sixers' business manager] in '68. I was with him for one year," said Pat Williams, who was raised in Wilmington and later became the Sixers' general manager for 12 seasons. "Tough little bulldog. He was tough as nails. And quiet. Didn't talk much ... but would just go out and perform. Maybe the best middle distance jump shooter of all-time. You could argue that. That 15-, 16-, 17-foot range. It was like a layup to him.”

http://www.app.com/article/BZ/20121227/ ... /312270026

It’s been echoed elsewhere that he had the best mid range jumper of his generation. Also effective on both ends of the floor, and could post you up on either baseline. Stayed within the confines of his game, which ultimately led to team success. If he had range out to 17 feet, it stands to reason he would’ve been able to develop a 3 pointer in this era.

Some great videos on the 67 sixers from (I believe) our own Dipper 13:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tbuMbhngis[/youtube]

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Np29MW_XN8[/youtube]

[trex_8063]

Relocating this discussion here since he's still on the table....

I'll just come in in defense of Brand. I'll say this though, I never thought Marion would get in and it be with me not voting voting for him. But he's just last amongst a pack of guys I've had at the top of my list for more than 10 rounds (Nance, Brand, Marion). In any case ...

Now I'm going to pretend he had strong supporting casts in ANY of those years. However, I think it's a little unacceptable that a 2nd-year Brand can't get a team (any team) to 16 wins

I think you have to be ignoring the cast if you're putting 15 wins on Brand (the blame for, that is).

I’m not “blaming” Brand for 15 wins. I’m asking “why couldn’t he lift them to better?” And there is a difference. I think a player of Brand’s caliber (or at least, what his numbers would lead one to think his caliber to be) should be able to lift ANY roster of legitimate NBA-level players to better than that.

If you use EWA (and set replacement level at 11 PER, which roughly where it is on average though it varies by position), here's the credit for that team

Elton Brand 13.59024876
Brad Miller 3.852537313
Fred Hoiberg 4.807014925
Ron Mercer 4.792537313
Metta World Peace 3.056616915
Khalid El-Amin 0.55880597
Marcus Fizer 0
A.J. Guyton -0.219402985
Michael Ruffin -0.39358209
Corey Benjamin -0.93800995
Jamal Crawford -1.305970149
Bryce Drew -2.012686567
Jake Voskuhl -0.369950249
Dragan Tarlac -1.606567164
Steve Goodrich -0.456567164
Dalibor Bagaric -0.992189055
with a total of 22.36283582

Now obviously EWA comes out with too many wins (for all teams). But it has Brand contributing over half his teams net wins. And this isn't over a replacement level player (who might contribute some wins).

I indicated that while Brand’s boxscore metrics do look really impressive, I have concerns that his stats may have been “emtpy” to some degree during his early years, as they did not appear to correlate with any appreciable team success. Countering with another stat which is based on boxscore metrics doesn’t do a lot to assuage those concerns.

Further, if the implication is that Brand was responsible for ~13 of those wins (i.e. they’d have only won 2 games out of 82 without him), then I’m afraid I’m just not aboard with that idea.

Looking back thru the nearly 70 years of BAA/NBA history (plus 9 years of ABA history), the worst team record ever recorded was the ‘12 Bobcats at 7-59 (.106). Next worst was the now defunct Providence Steamrollers in ‘48, with a record of 6-42 (.125). The next worse is a tie between the ‘93 Mavericks and the ‘98 Nuggets, at 11-71 (.134) each. Next worst is the ‘87 Clippers at 12-70 (.146). And the next worst is a tie between the ‘94 Mavericks and the ‘05 Hawks at 13-69 (.159) each.
So out of all this time, and out of the thousands of teams assembled in that span, there has NEVER been a team wasn’t on pace to at the very least win “about” 9 games out of 82, and only ONE team (out of >1000) that wasn’t on pace to win >10.

And looking at what the sans-Brand roster of the ‘01 Bulls, I personally don’t think it looks significantly worse than the ‘93 Mavs, ‘05 Hawks, or ‘98 Nuggets.

In short, I suspect this is a team that is capable of winning 9-12 games even without Brand. So I find it disappointing that his presence only succeeds in bringing them up to a still abysmal 15.

Further, I look at the before/after pictures of these early Brand teams, noting major transactions (admittedly a ton of transition/rebuilding happening in Chicago, so no real chance to build chemistry).....

Chicago
‘99: 13-37 (.260)
‘00: Obtain rookies Elton Brand, Ron Artest and Michael Ruffin. Also get Fred Hoiberg, Matt Maloney, and aging Hersey Hawkins, and get Chris Carr at mid-season. Lost Brent Barry, aging Mark Bryant, and aging Ron Harper. Coach is the same.
17-65 (.207).
’01: Obtain Ron Mercer, Bryce Drew, and a massive batch of rookies: Jamal Crawford, Marcus Fizer (who I was really disappointed in; I kinda had big hopes for him), Khalid El-Amin, AJ Guyton, and Dragan Tarlac. Lost Toni Kukoc, Dickey Simpkins, and old versions of Hersey Hawkins and Will Perdue. Same coach.
15-67 (.183).
’02: Brand is gone. Also gone are Bryce Drew, Khalid El-Amin and Dragan Tarlac. Obtain rookies Eddy Curry, Trenton Hassell, and Tyson Chandler. They lose Ron Artest, Ron Mercer, and Brad Miller at mid-season, in exchange for Jalen Rose and Travis Best. Have aging Greg Anthony and Kevin Ollie for half the season only. Some coaching changes.
21-61 (.256).

Clippers
’01: (before Brand) 31-51 (.378)
’02: 39-43 (.476)
’03: Obtain Andre Miller. Lose Earl Boykins, some coaching shake-up. Michael Olowakandi misses significant games. 27-55 (.329).

…...it basically isn’t too flattering to Brand: during his early years, despite the big numbers, his teams don’t seem to improve/worsen significantly when he arrives/leaves.


Can also take a peak at with/without records, which is only somewhat more flattering:

‘00: 17-64 (.210) with, 0-1 w/o
‘01: 15-59 (.203) with, 0-8 w/o
‘02: 38-42 (.475) with, 1-1 (.500) w/o
‘03: 22-40 (.355) with, 5-15 (.250) w/o
‘04: 22-47 (.319) with, 6-7 (.462) w/o
‘05: 37-44 (.457) with, 0-1 w/o
‘06: 44-35 (.557) with, 3-0 (1.000) w/o
‘07: 40-40 (.500) with, 0-2 w/o
‘08: 1-7 (.125) with, 22-52 (.297) w/o


That's not to say that I think Brand is a totally unreasonable candidate at this point. But this is a concern. This apparent inability (for the most part) to generate team success----and I'm not suggesting he should have had those Bulls teams competing for a playoff spot or similar----it's a problem to me. Realistically, it's the biggest factor holding him back; because if you otherwise look only at his individual numbers you'd likely conclude he's a top 60-65 player all-time.

[trex_8063]

Gonna stick with Tony Parker again, as he's probably my #1 choice here and hope he garners a little buzz. He ranks #51 in my elaborate formula, #77 in the other (formulas cited in last thread; can repost on request). Further arguments in the spoiler below:

Spoiler:

There's a great deal of positive to be said for him......
In the last 12 seasons (not counting this current one) he's been no less than the 3rd-best---often the 2nd-best---player on FOUR title teams. He's been no less than 3rd-best on.....well, 10-11 contenders (because the Spurs have legitimately been contenders nearly every season of his career); and in the case of '12, at the very least, you can make an argument he was actually the #1 guy (at least a #1A/1B scenario) on a contender-level squad.

His rs stats over that 12-year span (863 rs games):
17.8 ppg/6.1 apg/2.6 tov @ 55.4% ts
19.7 PER, .156 WS/48, 110 ORtg/104 DRtg (+6) in 32.9 mpg

And he did this for what is generally one of the best and most balanced teams in the league.
He's fantastic at breaking guys down off the dribble (for his career 35.8% of his fga are from inside 3 ft), an outstanding finisher (career 65.4% from <3ft), and really a very good mid-range pull-up shooter, too. I have little doubt that a peak Tony Parker could have annually been putting up 22-24 ppg on decent efficiency for a lesser team.

wrt post-season, I think his playoff woes get marginally over-stated. His ps numbers over this same span do take a bit of a dip; however, closer scrutiny reveals that it's in a large part due to TWO bad playoff years ('03 and '05). If we look at the other TEN seasons in this span, his playoff numbers are:

19.04 PER, .103 WS/48 in 35.8 mpg. This is basically a typical post-season dip that we see from most players.

On the grandest stage (the Finals), he's had some poor performances, though he does have at least one very very nice finals performance in '07: 24.5 ppg/5.0/3.3 apg/3.0 tov @ 59.5% ts (Finals MVP).
And really, he was pretty good last year in the finals, too: 18.0 ppg/4.6 apg/2.0 tov @ 55.0% ts (non-existent rebounding, although you're not really counting on boards from your PG anyway).


I don't think DRtg (and thus ORtg/DRtg comparisons) really do him justice, as DRtg has a somewhat causal relationship with not only steals/blocks (which he doesn't get many of), but also defensive rebounds (which he's not a very good rebounding PG-->not really a big slam on him, because......PG; it's typically the least relevant skill/attribute for a PG).

Generally I would say Parker appears "checked in" on defense, certainly not a huge liability on that end (like say....certain years of Steve Nash, or Derrick Rose, whose defensive effort is abominable at times).

Non-scaled PI DRAPM for Parker:
'03--> +0.9
'04--> +0.5
'05--> -0.2
'06--> +0.9
'07--> -2.2
'08--> +1.01
'09--> +0.48
'10--> -0.21
'11--> -0.44
'12--> +1.16
'13--> +1.06
'14--> +0.20

Aside from one poor year in '07, he generally appears entirely decent defensively based on impact data (particularly for a PG).

His best 3-year and best 5-year combined PI RAPM marks are similar to guys like Tracy McGrady and Kevin Durant, and a little better than Pau Gasol.

Vote: Tony Parker.
(reserve right to switch to Dan Issel or Chris Webber if the wind blows that direction; could also be content supporting Hal Greer).

[ronnymac2]

Vote: Hal Greer

Switching to Greer. He actually has longer longevity than Brand and just as many if not more star seasons. He was the second best player on arguably the greatest team ever, and the second best offensive option on what was at the time the greatest offense ever, the first offense to ever break the 100 Offensive Rating barrier (1967 Philly). In the playoffs, he was even better that season: 27.7 points to lead the team, and 5.3 assists, which was second to Wilt.

Factoring in his consistency, he was the best guard of the decade after Jerry West and Oscar Robertson. Combo guard who could shoot from the mid-range, make plays for others, or slash and get fouled. 80% career free throw shooter.

[SactoKingsFan]

My top candidates for the next 10-15 spots:

Webber
Parker
Brand
Sheed
Greer
Bosh
Richmond/Mullin
Issel
Kemp/Grant
Lucas
T. Hardaway

I'll probably have to do some convincing to generate support for Richmond, who I think is really underrated by box score metrics. I'll do a Richmond post after Webber gets in.

Webber and Parker are still my top 2 candidates. Will wait and see how things unfold before casting an official vote.

[Quotatious]

Vote - Elton Brand

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).

[trex_8063]

Vote - Elton Brand

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......

What about Connie Hawkins? I actually think he peaked pretty high (difficult to assess given strength of the ABA at the time, but still...).

'68 Hawkins Per 100 Possessions: 26.7 pts, 13.4 reb, 4.6 ast, 2.9 tov @ 59.7% ts (+11.4% to league avg!)
28.8 PER, .273 WS/48 in massive 44.9 mpg.
Then rocked the playoffs to the tune of a 30.0 PER and .310 WS/48 (on 44.0 mpg) on their way to an ABA title.

I'm inclined to think this is an often overlooked player peak.

Some may also argue Penny ahead of Brand for peak, too (though fwiw I'm with you on that one: I'd rank Brand a little ahead).

EDIT: Spencer Haywood comes to mind as another potential higher peak.

[Moonbeam]

The next few guys on my pre-list are getting no love so far:

Neil Johnston
Bill Walton
Joe Dumars
Maurice Cheeks
Bill Sharman
Horace Grant

I might bump up Parker into that list, but I'm not quite ready to vote for him just yet. I think I'll throw my hat in for Maurice Cheeks. Incredible two-way player with great longevity. Not a huge scorer, but an efficient one, with a Score+ of 1.023, a PosScore+ of 1.356, and a TeamScore+ of 0.679. Pretty good distributor in his day, too, and a great defender as well.

In the postseason, he upped his scoring with barely any efficiency cost, though it resulted in a dip in assists. In the magical 1983 76er run, her put up 16.3 PPG on .549 TS with 7.0 APG against only 2.6 TOPG.

You can knock him for minutes somewhat, but I think he's well worth considering here.

[trex_8063]

Thru post #10 (weak-sauce again here):

Mel Daniels (1) - penbeast0

Elton Brand (2) - Owly, Quotatious

Hal Greer (2) - Clyde Frazier, ronnymac2

Tony Parker (1) - trex_8063

Maurice Cheeks (1) - Moonbeam

[Owly]

Relocating this discussion here since he's still on the table....

I'll just come in in defense of Brand. I'll say this though, I never thought Marion would get in and it be with me not voting voting for him. But he's just last amongst a pack of guys I've had at the top of my list for more than 10 rounds (Nance, Brand, Marion). In any case ...

Now I'm going to pretend he had strong supporting casts in ANY of those years. However, I think it's a little unacceptable that a 2nd-year Brand can't get a team (any team) to 16 wins

I think you have to be ignoring the cast if you're putting 15 wins on Brand (the blame for, that is).

I’m not “blaming” Brand for 15 wins. I’m asking “why couldn’t he lift them to better?” And there is a difference. I think a player of Brand’s caliber (or at least, what his numbers would lead one to think his caliber to be) should be able to lift ANY roster of legitimate NBA-level players to better than that.

If you use EWA (and set replacement level at 11 PER, which roughly where it is on average though it varies by position), here's the credit for that team

Elton Brand 13.59024876
Brad Miller 3.852537313
Fred Hoiberg 4.807014925
Ron Mercer 4.792537313
Metta World Peace 3.056616915
Khalid El-Amin 0.55880597
Marcus Fizer 0
A.J. Guyton -0.219402985
Michael Ruffin -0.39358209
Corey Benjamin -0.93800995
Jamal Crawford -1.305970149
Bryce Drew -2.012686567
Jake Voskuhl -0.369950249
Dragan Tarlac -1.606567164
Steve Goodrich -0.456567164
Dalibor Bagaric -0.992189055
with a total of 22.36283582

Now obviously EWA comes out with too many wins (for all teams). But it has Brand contributing over half his teams net wins. And this isn't over a replacement level player (who might contribute some wins).

I indicated that while Brand’s boxscore metrics do look really impressive, I have concerns that his stats may have been “emtpy” to some degree during his early years, as they did not appear to correlate with any appreciable team success. Countering with another stat which is based on boxscore metrics doesn’t do a lot to assuage those concerns.

Further, if the implication is that Brand was responsible for ~13 of those wins (i.e. they’d have only won 2 games out of 82 without him), then I’m afraid I’m just not aboard with that idea.

Looking back thru the nearly 70 years of BAA/NBA history (plus 9 years of ABA history), the worst team record ever recorded was the ‘12 Bobcats at 7-59 (.106). Next worst was the now defunct Providence Steamrollers in ‘48, with a record of 6-42 (.125). The next worse is a tie between the ‘93 Mavericks and the ‘98 Nuggets, at 11-71 (.134) each. Next worst is the ‘87 Clippers at 12-70 (.146). And the next worst is a tie between the ‘94 Mavericks and the ‘05 Hawks at 13-69 (.159) each.
So out of all this time, and out of the thousands of teams assembled in that span, there has NEVER been a team wasn’t on pace to at the very least win “about” 9 games out of 82, and only ONE team (out of >1000) that wasn’t on pace to win >10.

And looking at what the sans-Brand roster of the ‘01 Bulls, I personally don’t think it looks significantly worse than the ‘93 Mavs, ‘05 Hawks, or ‘98 Nuggets.

In short, I suspect this is a team that is capable of winning 9-12 games even without Brand. So I find it disappointing that his presence only succeeds in bringing them up to a still abysmal 15.

Further, I look at the before/after pictures of these early Brand teams, noting major transactions (admittedly a ton of transition/rebuilding happening in Chicago, so no real chance to build chemistry).....

Chicago
‘99: 13-37 (.260)
‘00: Obtain rookies Elton Brand, Ron Artest and Michael Ruffin. Also get Fred Hoiberg, Matt Maloney, and aging Hersey Hawkins, and get Chris Carr at mid-season. Lost Brent Barry, aging Mark Bryant, and aging Ron Harper. Coach is the same.
17-65 (.207).
’01: Obtain Ron Mercer, Bryce Drew, and a massive batch of rookies: Jamal Crawford, Marcus Fizer (who I was really disappointed in; I kinda had big hopes for him), Khalid El-Amin, AJ Guyton, and Dragan Tarlac. Lost Toni Kukoc, Dickey Simpkins, and old versions of Hersey Hawkins and Will Perdue. Same coach.
15-67 (.183).
’02: Brand is gone. Also gone are Bryce Drew, Khalid El-Amin and Dragan Tarlac. Obtain rookies Eddy Curry, Trenton Hassell, and Tyson Chandler. They lose Ron Artest, Ron Mercer, and Brad Miller at mid-season, in exchange for Jalen Rose and Travis Best. Have aging Greg Anthony and Kevin Ollie for half the season only. Some coaching changes.
21-61 (.256).

Clippers
’01: (before Brand) 31-51 (.378)
’02: 39-43 (.476)
’03: Obtain Andre Miller. Lose Earl Boykins, some coaching shake-up. Michael Olowakandi misses significant games. 27-55 (.329).

…...it basically isn’t too flattering to Brand: during his early years, despite the big numbers, his teams don’t seem to improve/worsen significantly when he arrives/leaves.


Can also take a peak at with/without records, which is only somewhat more flattering:

‘00: 17-64 (.210) with, 0-1 w/o
‘01: 15-59 (.203) with, 0-8 w/o
‘02: 38-42 (.475) with, 1-1 (.500) w/o
‘03: 22-40 (.355) with, 5-15 (.250) w/o
‘04: 22-47 (.319) with, 6-7 (.462) w/o
‘05: 37-44 (.457) with, 0-1 w/o
‘06: 44-35 (.557) with, 3-0 (1.000) w/o
‘07: 40-40 (.500) with, 0-2 w/o
‘08: 1-7 (.125) with, 22-52 (.297) w/o


That's not to say that I think Brand is a totally unreasonable candidate at this point. But this is a concern. This apparent inability (for the most part) to generate team success----and I'm not suggesting he should have had those Bulls teams competing for a playoff spot or similar----it's a problem to me. Realistically, it's the biggest factor holding him back; because if you otherwise look only at his individual numbers you'd likely conclude he's a top 60-65 player all-time.

The first element of my response is to say there's difficulty in discussing players in terms of wins, and team records, in part because of the game-by-game discrete nature of binary wins and losses (where contribution is more of a big picture thing), in part because of language (see immediately below), in part because doing it properly requires looking at how many wins you think every player on the roster contributed (and whether coaching is harming the win-loss total) and most just don't have the time to do that.

Whilst I don't think you were, per-se blaming Brand for the Bulls being a 15 win team, I had to use that term to distinguish between that and crediting him with his being worth a large part of that balance, given you were criticizing him for being on a 15 win team.

Anyhow difficulties aside, I'll try to clarify further and offer any responses required ...

I think a player of Brand’s caliber (or at least, what his numbers would lead one to think his caliber to be) should be able to lift ANY roster of legitimate NBA-level players to better than that.

See the body of my previous post. What makes you think that Chicago roster was a roster of legitimate NBA-level players trying to eke out every win possible. There's players (using a metric that has players at a 0 win baseline - not a replacement level 10-15 win team player level -, and, I believe, consistently over-predicts wins) costing two wins.

If you go down that roster and see a bunch of guys who are NBA level players fine. If however you see a "tanking" culture i.e. taking fliers on young players to see if they can play in the NBA, giving young players players more minutes than might be considered "earned" in the hope it helps them develop, a cheap roster, a lack of continuity and D and a coach that couldn't seem to cut it in the NBA maybe that changes things.

Further, if the implication is that Brand was responsible for ~13 of those wins (i.e. they’d have only won 2 games out of 82 without him), then I’m afraid I’m just not aboard with that idea.

It isn't. As noted EWA (from my limited experience) over-estimates, but proportionally that he'sworth over half their wins seems somewhat plausible, though there is somewhat of a problem here again with the wins barometer as I will touch on from your development of this point.

Looking back thru the nearly 70 years of BAA/NBA history (plus 9 years of ABA history), the worst team record ever recorded was the ‘12 Bobcats at 7-59 (.106). Next worst was the now defunct Providence Steamrollers in ‘48, with a record of 6-42 (.125). The next worse is a tie between the ‘93 Mavericks and the ‘98 Nuggets, at 11-71 (.134) each. Next worst is the ‘87 Clippers at 12-70 (.146). And the next worst is a tie between the ‘94 Mavericks and the ‘05 Hawks at 13-69 (.159) each.
So out of all this time, and out of the thousands of teams assembled in that span, there has NEVER been a team wasn’t on pace to at the very least win “about” 9 games out of 82, and only ONE team (out of >1000) that wasn’t on pace to win >10.

And looking at what the sans-Brand roster of the ‘01 Bulls, I personally don’t think it looks significantly worse than the ‘93 Mavs, ‘05 Hawks, or ‘98 Nuggets.

In short, I suspect this is a team that is capable of winning 9-12 games even without Brand. So I find it disappointing that his presence only succeeds in bringing them up to a still abysmal 15.

At the extremes terrible (or incredible) teams win (or lose) some games by dumb luck in a small sample size (single games). As a result of this it takes more badness (or goodness) at the extreme ends of the scale to move by one win. Big picture this is problem with wins as a metric, with "wins" not representing a constant value. Specifically in this instance it means Brand has to do more to improve a team by a specific number of wins that would typically be the case.

As for "without Brand" 9-12 wins, with what are you replacing Brand's minutes? A league average starter? A replacement level player? A zero win player? Bulls PFs (Fizer, Ruffin, Goodrich)?

Further, I look at the before/after pictures of these early Brand teams, noting major transactions (admittedly a ton of transition/rebuilding happening in Chicago, so no real chance to build chemistry).....

Chicago
‘99: 13-37 (.260)
‘00: Obtain rookies Elton Brand, Ron Artest and Michael Ruffin. Also get Fred Hoiberg, Matt Maloney, and aging Hersey Hawkins, and get Chris Carr at mid-season. Lost Brent Barry, aging Mark Bryant, and aging Ron Harper. Coach is the same.
17-65 (.207).
’01: Obtain Ron Mercer, Bryce Drew, and a massive batch of rookies: Jamal Crawford, Marcus Fizer (who I was really disappointed in; I kinda had big hopes for him), Khalid El-Amin, AJ Guyton, and Dragan Tarlac. Lost Toni Kukoc, Dickey Simpkins, and old versions of Hersey Hawkins and Will Perdue. Same coach.
15-67 (.183).
’02: Brand is gone. Also gone are Bryce Drew, Khalid El-Amin and Dragan Tarlac. Obtain rookies Eddy Curry, Trenton Hassell, and Tyson Chandler. They lose Ron Artest, Ron Mercer, and Brad Miller at mid-season, in exchange for Jalen Rose and Travis Best. Have aging Greg Anthony and Kevin Ollie for half the season only. Some coaching changes.
21-61 (.256).

Clippers
’01: (before Brand) 31-51 (.378)
’02: 39-43 (.476)
’03: Obtain Andre Miller. Lose Earl Boykins, some coaching shake-up. Michael Olowakandi misses significant games. 27-55 (.329).

…...it basically isn’t too flattering to Brand: during his early years, despite the big numbers, his teams don’t seem to improve/worsen significantly when he arrives/leaves.

Okay the headline that I'd take issue here with is the inclusion of '03 in a nominally "impact on arrival/departure" analysis. I just don't understand why it's there (other than to attempt to make Brand look bad). If '03 is an issue raise it, but raise it, don't put it where it doesn't make sense.

Other notes
'99: Perhaps a slightly "off" baseline (possibly in part due to the smaller sample) the Bulls post an SRS that should have earned them just a 9-41 record.
Then as you note there's massive continuity issues, plus a poor coach with a mandate to continue with a triangle offense (despite youth and team turnover). It's a bad situation and a difficult one to measure individual impact.

Clippers, on arrival leap up 8 wins.

Now if you want to discuss '03 fine. But it's not an upon arrival season. And I don't think it hurts Brand's stock. In part because your counting shows they're .105 worse without him, that account for a couple of games straight away. Throw in Brand's injuries making him play notably worse than the rest of his prime and you get a handful more (and an indication of a healthy Brand's impact). Throw in Maggette and Richardson's injuries on top of Olowakandi's and basically everyone's except ... Andre Miller who threw up perhaps the worst and most puzzling down year in a prime players career ever (mishandled by Gentry, Miller saw far less of the ball in isos and in the post, with Gentry running a lot of the offense through Olowakandi as a first option and then Odom, and spent more time hanging out on the perimeter launching 3s, though it looks as though he was less energetic in other areas, so it wasn’t just coaching), in fairness though Miller probably wasn’t costing wins on the prior year since he’d arrived for Darius Miles, a lesser player. Throw in that 5 of the top 6 guys in minutes that year (Brand, Odom, Maggette, Miller and Olowakandi) were all free agents in 2003 (Odom and Maggette restricted) so that probably screwed with cohesion quite a bit).

I indicated that while Brand’s boxscore metrics do look really impressive, I have concerns that his stats may have been “emtpy” to some degree during his early years, as they did not appear to correlate with any appreciable team success. Countering with another stat which is based on boxscore metrics doesn’t do a lot to assuage those concerns.

I’ve indicated some of the issues with using wins (not that they shouldn’t be used but with caution, and with a comprehensive look at context, rather than something that feels like “x wins is a bit disappointing”), on the flip side of this I’ll argue against “empty” stats. At least non-specific ones. If you’ve looked at JJ Hickson’s rebounding, and the team does better on the boards without him, and it doesn’t seem to be because of lineups with and without, then we can say “He’s cannibalizing easy team rebounds, those stats are empty”. If a player gambles excessively for steals, to the detriment of his team’s defense, we can say “He’s hurting his team, those are empty stats.” If there is evidence a player dominates the ball, holding it without pressuring or distorting the defense, or plays lazy defense (or forgets plays, fails to box out etc) we can say he is worse than his boxscore (if the ball dominant guy gets assists from passing at the end of the shot clock – we might specifically point to empty assists). But it’s hard for me to buy into “empty stats” without any evidence of how or why they might be so. OTOH it might be that Brand got easy rebounds playing for a bad (rebounding) team, at least in Chicago, but then he kept it up in LA, and got a large proportion of his boards on offense (whilst Olowakandi got more of the easier, team expected, defensive boards). The point wasn’t primarily that his numbers are great (though they are) it’s that (to be persuasive) you need to back up this “bad teams, ergo empty numbers” hypothesis with contextual support, and I don’t think it’s there.

Can also take a peak at with/without records, which is only somewhat more flattering:

‘00: 17-64 (.210) with, 0-1 w/o
‘01: 15-59 (.203) with, 0-8 w/o
‘02: 38-42 (.475) with, 1-1 (.500) w/o
‘03: 22-40 (.355) with, 5-15 (.250) w/o
‘04: 22-47 (.319) with, 6-7 (.462) w/o
‘05: 37-44 (.457) with, 0-1 w/o
‘06: 44-35 (.557) with, 3-0 (1.000) w/o
‘07: 40-40 (.500) with, 0-2 w/o
‘08: 1-7 (.125) with, 22-52 (.297) w/o

’00 – Single game missed was a 14 point loss to a poor Cleveland team.
’01 – 8 games missed. -629 over 74 games with for -8.5 with, -117 over 8 games without for -15. There’s a difference of 6.5 (and helps vindicate how awful those Bulls teams were).
I don’t have time to go through each one right now but it doesn’t look to me like there’s the evidence there for this “empty stats” claim. Even in an injury hit down year the binary w-l says he’s worth (slightly more than) .100 or a touch over 8 wins a season (though, whilst this is the largest sample, there’s huge noise going on that year).

[penbeast0]

Using trex's count, we are into the runoff.

[SactoKingsFan]

I'll go with Brand in the run-off. Brand peaked higher, had the more impressive prime and played in a tougher era. Not much of a playoff resume, but I don't think too much of that should be held against Brand. Just played on some bad teams with subpar talent.

Run-off vote: Elton Brand

[trex_8063]

Run-off vote: Hal Greer.

I must admit I feel pulled toward him in part due to principle of wanting to have some internal consistency here. While in many circles history appears to consider Sam Jones the better player, there seemed to be little consensus on that point during much of their overlapping careers, where Greer was selected as an All-Star for a decade solid, including 7 consecutive years as All-NBA 2nd team (vs. 5 and 3, respectively, for Jones).

During his decade-long span as an NBA All-Star, Greer had a PER of 16.6 and WS/48 of .135 (some of this in an era where there appears to be a lot of parity in these stats, particularly PER----Reed was winning MVP or coming in second with PER's of 21.4 and 20.3, for example) while averaging a pretty sizable 38.1 mpg.
While Jones did indeed have somewhat better looking PER and WS/48 stats, it's worth considering that he was doing that on considerably fewer minutes. In fact, his single-season HIGH in mpg still falls 2 minutes shy of what Greer was averaging for that solid decade. Jones has just ONE season in his entire career where he was averaging more mpg than the single-season LOW of Greer's 10-year prime.
Greer played 5,581 more minutes minutes during that decade than Jones did in his entire career. His edge on Jones in total rs minutes is 15,503......that's more than the entire career (rs and playoff minutes combined) of Bill Walton or Ralph Sampson. To me that's a lot of added career value, considering Greer was a in some way a relevant role player at least up until his final year. And given Jones was voted in 11 places ago........

So that's my plug for consistency.

vs Brand, I just like Greer's career legacy a bit more. Longer prime, much more significant playoff resume. Was an amazing mid-range shooter (who I can only assume would benefit from a 3pt line) who was nearly +2% ts to league avg for his career in an era that didn't encourage efficiency really at all. A savvy offensive player (who once made a rookie Walt Frazier cry) who remained relevant for nearly a decade and a half.

Aside from rs legacy alluded to above, he's got a large (and mostly positive) playoff resume, including being the 2nd-leading scorer during the rs for what may have been the GOAT team......was their leading scorer (by a handy margin, too) during the playoffs that year, where he had a playoff PER and WS/48 of 16.1 and .131 while shouldering an enormous 45.9 mpg. Aside from 10-time All-Star and all (yeah, the media liked him), his peers once ranked him 6th in MVP voting, too.

[Doctor MJ]

Apologies for going awol after Jones got in. I had been very busy, and as long as Jones was there, I knew my pick. Since then I haven't been able to make up my mind.

I will say of the guys mentioned here, Cheeks and Daniels are the ones that stand out to me. I didn't think too highly of Marion or Brand.
Brand was a solid guy, but if you're looking at his +/- impact, he clearly totally outclassed by draft mate Baron Davis, and I doubt most here are even thinking of Baron right now. Brand's good at what he does, but he's still a big whose not a DPOY threat, and there's a limit to what one of those can give you if they aren't Shaq-omega-level bigs.

Of course that doesn't mean Greer's the superior player. I don't feel all that confident about that. Greer seems to some degree to be a guy in the right place at the right time.

Still, he plays a role that's more clearly necessary than Brand. While one can and should object to calling Greer the true best scorer on those great 76er teams, it's not a coincidence that when Wilt truly succeeded, it was with someone like Greer shooting more than he did.

Vote: Hal Greer

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

Run-off vote: Elton Brand
The 1990-91 Golden State Warriors attempted 89.6 FG per game and 33.7 FT per game
The 2014-15 Golden State Warriors attempted 87.1 FG per game and 21.7 FT per game
The 1967-68 Philadelphia 76ers attempted 102.6 FG per game and 40.7 FT per game
The 1966-67 Philadelphia 76ers attempted 100.0 FG per game and 42.1 FT per game
The 1962-63 Syracuse Nationals attempted 103.6 FG per game and 37.6 FT per game
Those were some of Greer's best years and one of Tim Hardaway's best years
A pace adjustment needs to be applied to Geer.

I apply a subjective quality of competition adjustment to Geer.

I would rather vote for Tim Hardaway than Geer. Tim Hardaway impressed me more than Geer impressed me in what little game film of Geer I saw.

Also Geer's career playoff fg% is 42.5

[Moonbeam]

Runoff vote: Elton Brand

It's sad how quickly his star fell, because it was really bright for awhile, and he really was the first player to make the Clippers respectable. Greer appears to have had a long, solid career, but he's not on my radar yet, while Brand is.

[Dipper 13]

It’s been echoed elsewhere that he had the best mid range jumper of his generation. Also effective on both ends of the floor, and could post you up on either baseline. Stayed within the confines of his game, which ultimately led to team success. If he had range out to 17 feet, it stands to reason he would’ve been able to develop a 3 pointer in this era.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6bzGDqtDHqg&t=14m8s

Tremendous athlete as well, great agility & quickness and could stop on a dime and pull up. It is not surprising to see Greer fall this low, seeing as he apparently was underrated by most even during his playing days. Not being a self promoter or big interview with the press will do that, plus he was overshadowed by Wilt during some of his best years. I'm sure if the Sixers had repeated in 1968, then Greer would have been voted in well before this point. Wilt even said he was on par with Robertson or West, for what it is worth.

Spoiler:

Season of the 76ers: the story of Wilt Chamberlain and the 1967 NBA champions - Wayne Lynch

"I think I'm better than the fourth guard," Greer told reporters. "You gotta realize that Oscar is the greatest. Jerry West is right behind Oscar, but I think I should be up there. I think I'm on a par with West.



Dynasty's End: Bill Russell And the 1968-69 World Champion Boston Celtics - Thomas J. Whalen

"Hal needs a certain amount of recognition to show people that he's on par with Robertson and West," All-Star teammate Wilt Chamberlain said afterward.

Greer needed no convincing himself. He knew he was the equal of any elite guard in the league, and that included Sam Jones of the Celtics. "He's on a team where they work for him," Greer said. "Our team is balanced. We're a team all the way. We don't work for one guy. Sam doesn't really have to work for his shots. They work for him. He's strictly offense, I'm offense plus I move the ball, too. I move on the fast break." Always intense and demanding of himself as a player, Greer strove for nothing short of basketball perfection in every contest. "After a game," he once revealed, "I think about the mistakes I made on defense that night. Sometimes I stay up all night thinking about defense, like after I've been chasing Oscar all over the court. That's enough to keep any man awake."'



The Sun - Nov 16, 1965

It's generally acknowledged in basketball circles that there are three superstar backcourters, Oscar Robertson, Jerry West and Sam Jones . . . and then there's Philadelphia's Hal Greer. Greer is the most underrated player in the league. He's among the top five in my opinion. Teammate Al Bianchi adds, "He has to be one of the greatest backcourt shooters ever." He rates with Sharman, Robertson, and West when it comes to hitting the 15-20 foot jumper.

The league alerted everybody about West and Bailey Howell nearing 10,000 points. Forgot Greer of course. "My wife and I talk about it a lot", admits the eight year veteran who climbed over the 10,000 figure with 33 tallies at New York's expense Saturday night. Howell and West reached it Sunday. "I don't like it but what can you do about it. As long as we're winning that's the important thing. The ink is all right but winning is the thing. I think I'm better than the fourth guard in the league."



The Black Athlete: Emergence & Arrival - 1968

No one in basketball is more effective than Hal Greer at sprinting down the middle of the court on a fast break, stopping just beyond the keyhole and scoring on a jump shot. "Hal," said one NBA coach, "has the finest middle-distance shot in the game." From fifteen to eighteen feet, Greer is more deadly than the Big O." At 6 ft. 3 in. and 178 pounds, Greer frequently gives away 40 pounds and 6 inches to NBA adversaries assigned to shutting off the middle. The key to Greer's success, therefore, is maneuverability and speed. Particularly speed.



Great teams of pro basketball - 1971

First there was Hal Greer, one of the best guards in the game. He was fast. "I must be fast," Greer said, "always, always quick. The day I slow down I'm finished." And he was a constant scoring threat. Said his former coach, Dolph Schayes, "Hal has the finest middle-distance shot in the game. From 15 to 18 feet, Hal is more deadly than Oscar Robertson." At 6'2", 175 pounds, Greer was agile, strong and not prone to injury. An eight-year veteran of NBA play, he could be counted on to average 20 points a game and contribute steadily in assists.



The Game Within the Game - Walt Frazier





Hal Greer: Productive, Consistent and Durable

This article originally appeared in the January 2006 issue of Hoop.

Star Guard on a Team for the Ages

Hal Greer made the All-NBA Second Team seven straight years but never was selected to the All-NBA First Team. That’s what happens when you play during the same era as Oscar Robertson and Jerry West, but Greer--a 10-time All-Star who was honored as one of the NBA’s 50 Greatest Players--accomplished something that neither Robertson nor West did: being the leading playoff scorer on a team that defeated Bill Russell’s Boston Celtics in the playoffs and went on to win an NBA championship.

Russell’s Celtics won eight straight titles and 11 in 13 seasons, but many observers still maintain that the greatest single season team in NBA history is the 1966-67 Philadelphia 76ers. The Sixers beat Boston 4-1 in the Eastern Division finals and then defeated the Rick Barry-Nate Thurmond San Francisco Warriors in the NBA Finals. Greer produced 27.7 ppg, 5.9 rpg and 5.3 apg in the playoffs, while his teammate Wilt Chamberlain posted these mind-boggling numbers: 21.7 ppg, 29.1 rpg and 9.0 apg. Hall of Famer and Top 50 selection Billy Cunningham, the sixth man on the 1967 championship team, says, “Hal Greer was such a smart player. In his mind he had a book about every player he played against and what he had to do to make sure that he got free to get shots. He was probably as fine a screener as a guard as anybody. The thing about it was he knew that if he set a good screen then he would be open because he would force a switch and he would end up being matched up with a bigger, slower player that he knew he could easily beat to get whatever shot he wanted.”

Remember the old shoe commercial with playground legend Lamar Mundane? The voiceover said that Mundane would shoot as soon as he crossed midcourt and the fans would yell, “Layup!” That would be a good way to describe Hal Greer’s top of the key jump shot; Sixers coach Alex Hannum said that Greer made that shot at a 70% clip and gave Greer the green light to launch from that range whenever he was open. Greer’s jump shot was so fluid and so deadly that he shot his free throws that way, connecting on better than 80% of his career attempts. Cunningham offers high praise for Greer’s jump shot: “It was as good as anybody’s who ever played the game. I think the beauty of Hal Greer’s game is that he knew where he was most effective and he never shot the ball from an area where he was not completely confident and comfortable. He never went outside of 18-20 feet maximum, but he was deadly and he had the ability to get to that spot.”



The Palm Beach Post - Apr 2, 1967

"Greer plays the complete game,' said Hannum, "He's an offensive threat every minute he's in there. He has the perfect disposition, is well liked by everybody. We wouldn't have near the record this team has without Hal. You hear about our powerful front line of Wilt, Luke Jackson, Chet Walker and Billy Cunningham, but Greer's outside shooting helps make this possible."

Greer admits that the toughest guard in the league against him is Boston's K.C. Jones, but denies the rap placed on him by some writers that he gets "K.C.-itus"

"The three best games of my career have been against Boston," he notes. "I scored 50 points against them my first year in the league, 45 against them here, and 38 this season in Boston."

While he is recognized generally as one of the top offensive players in the game, few people are aware that Greer can play defense with the best. Often, Hannum will send Greer after Oscar Robertson, Jerry West, Rick Barry, or Sam Jones, at least until the 76ers' guard gets into foul difficulty.

[trex_8063]

Run-off vote: Elton Brand
The 1990-91 Golden State Warriors attempted 89.6 FG per game and 33.7 FT per game
The 2014-15 Golden State Warriors attempted 87.1 FG per game and 21.7 FT per game
The 1967-68 Philadelphia 76ers attempted 102.6 FG per game and 40.7 FT per game
The 1966-67 Philadelphia 76ers attempted 100.0 FG per game and 42.1 FT per game
The 1962-63 Syracuse Nationals attempted 103.6 FG per game and 37.6 FT per game
Those were some of Greer's best years and one of Tim Hardaway's best years
A pace adjustment needs to be applied to Geer.

OK, here's his prime.....
Per 100 possessions
'61 Greer: 20.9 pts, 6.1 reb, 4.1 ast
'62 Greer: 22.3 pts, 7.2 reb, 4.3 ast
'63 Greer: 23.1 pts, 6.8 reb, 4.1 ast
'64 Greer: 23.7 pts, 6.2 reb, 4.8 ast
'65 Greer: 21.9 pts, 5.5 reb, 4.9 ast
'66 Greer: 21.4 pts, 5.6 reb, 4.5 ast
'67 Greer: 22.3 pts, 5.3 reb, 3.8 ast
'68 Greer: 23.4 pts, 5.3 reb, 4.4 ast
'69 Greer: 22.8 pts, 5.2 reb, 5.0 ast
'70 Greer: 23.1 pts, 4.9 reb, 5.3 ast

So on avg approximately 22.5 pts, 6 reb, 4.5 ast per 100 poss during his prime.

Also Geer's career playoff fg% is 42.5

Now this isn't being fair (or consistent). You want pace adjusted for, but here you're just citing raw fg% without adjusting for league avg shooting efficiency--->which is influenced by the very pace factor you said needs to be accounted for, as well as lack of 3pt line, spacing, hand-checking rules, etc.

Relative (to league avg) TS%
'61 Greer: +2.95%
'62 Greer: +2.11%
'63 Greer: +3.38%
'64 Greer: +2.14%
'65 Greer: +1.63%
'66 Greer: +1.70%
'67 Greer: +1.71%
'68 Greer: +3.12%
'69 Greer: +2.62%
'70 Greer: -0.50%

Overall, averaged out around +2.2% to league for his prime in the rs.
And wrt the career playoff shooting efficiency you're referring to: his career playoff TS% was 49.1%; regular season league avg over same years was 48.5% (playoff avg was probably even marginally lower).