RealGM Top 100 List #84

Post #1 » by **penbeast0** » Thu Feb 19, 2015 11:20 pm

PG: Tim Hardaway, Mark Price, and maybe Mookie Blaylock are the players I'm looking at . . . should mention 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). Rasheed Wallace got support earlier though I've never been a fan of his.

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. Tim Hardaway v. Mark Price, Mo Cheeks 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 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.

Post #2 » by **penbeast0** » Thu Feb 19, 2015 11:39 pm

Let me compare Mel Daniels to Chris Webber.

Obviously Webber played in a stronger league and has a strong longevity edge. Equally obvious is Daniel's was far more respected as a dominant force and team leader as shown by his two MVP awards.

Scoring: Webber career 28.3 pp100pos on .513ts%; Daniels career 21.4 pp100po on .507ts% (in a faster paced league that was less efficient). Clear advantage Webber.

Defense: Daniels was a physical force in the post and an intimidating bruiser on opponents driving the lane; Webber was not a good post defender but was much quicker and able to guard away from the basket more easily. Daniels's team defenses tended to be better than Webber's but that's a very noisy stat.

Rebounding: Daniels pulls down 17.3 reb100poss, Webber only 13.4 despite Daniels playing next to superior rebounders (Neto, McGinnis, Hillman v. Charles Jones, Muresan, Divac). Clear advantage Daniels.

Playmaking: Webber was a terrific passer (5.8/100poss); Daniels average at best (2.8/100poss). Clear advantage Webber.

Intangibles: Ignoring accolades, Daniels was a coach's favorite and icon in Indiana even today. Webber whined his way out of Golden State and Washington before finding success in Sacramento and had many off court issues as well. Webber also is probably the single player in NBA history most known for blowing it mentally in the clutch, first in college then in the pros. Clear advantage Daniels.

Hard to find two more contrasting big men. If you believe that a relatively inefficient but high scoring, great passing, average defensive big man is more valuable than an average efficiency for his day, great rebounding, physical defender or you feel that early ABA greats (of whom Daniels, Hawkins, and Haywood were the 3 main stars) wouldn't translate to other eras, then you support Webber. If you value intangibles and a winning (3 ABA titles in his prime) and feel that physical intimidating bigs are a key to success then you can support Mel Daniels.

You know which side I am on.

SactoKingsFan · Post #3 » by **SactoKingsFan** » Thu Feb 19, 2015 11:40 pm

Voting for Chris Webber until he gets voted in.

Same reasons as before:

Spoiler:

Post #4 » by **Quotatious** » Thu Feb 19, 2015 11:46 pm

Vote: Horace Grant

Chris Bosh doesn't get any support except for my own vote, and seeing players like Bobby Jones or Maurice Cheeks already in (so excellent defenders and efficient scorers on a moderate volume, basically super role players), I think it's time for Grant to get in, as well.

Extremely smart and unselfish player, excellent defender (for those who care about All-Defensive teams - he made the 2nd team four times in his career), solid rebounder (14.1% TRB for his career, both in the regular season and playoffs, but peaked at 17.5% in the '93-'94 RS), very good passer for a bigman, solid midrange shooter with decent range. Very good longevity, very reliable playoff performer (for example his TS%, WS/48 and BPM all clearly go up in the postseason, PER goes down just slightly, despite the fact that he played 36.3 MPG in the PS compared to 33.2 in RS). It's not like it's based on a small sample size - he played 170 playoff games in his career, most of those in his prime.

The most impressive thing about Grant (to me anyway) is his 1991-92 regular season. Just take a look at his numbers - he finished 3rd in the league in WS/48, 5th in TS%, 5th in BPM, 6th in VORP, and led the league in ORtg, at 132 (also ranked 7th in DRtg). His 132 ORtg is the second highest of all-time, slightly behind 2012-13 Tyson Chandler. He also had 20.7 PER. These numbers make him look like an absolutely legitimate All-Star (he didn't make it that year, though - he only made one All-Star appearance, in '94), and he's a pretty big reason why the Bulls won 67 games in the '91-'92 RS. His advanced metrics in '92 are extremely comparable to Pippen's - obviously Scottie had a much higher usage, much bigger offensive responsibilities (24.6 to 15.5% USG), so I'd say that he was better, but it was fairly close. FWIW, Grant was much closer to Pippen, than Pippen was to Jordan (and I think it's a nice way to prop Horace up, considering that both Pippen and Grant were in their primes, and Pippen is a top 30 player of all-time - actually he's ranked 27th on our list).

So, if Grant can be mostly considered a "super role player", he was definitely more than that during the '91-'92 season. He was along the lines of 2004 Andrei Kirilenko - legit All-Star who played like a role player.

Hoping to see more support for Grant.

Post #5 » by **Clyde Frazier** » Fri Feb 20, 2015 12:03 am

Will be putting in my vote for carmelo again later tonight, but thoughts on billy cunningham?

http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... ibi01.html

Reminds me a lot of cowens, and while his longevity is just so so, he had some impressive seasons.

Jaivl · Post #6 » by **Jaivl** » Fri Feb 20, 2015 12:19 am

I guess I'm back!

Vote: Rasheed Wallace

Just a few bullet points: no player left can sniff his total impact in the game. Rare combination of great defense + spacing. No real holes in his game, just in his head... but if he hadn't those issues I would have already voted him long ago. Seems extremely impressive in RAPM studies. My data has him in the same tier as Ginóbili and Iverson, both voted about 25 positions ago (viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1373366#start_here). Proven ability to play well on multiple roles (star, secondary star, rotation player).

ronnymac2 · Post #7 » by **ronnymac2** » Fri Feb 20, 2015 12:47 am

Vote: Chris Webber

Could go with Cunningham. Maybe Grant or Sheed. For now, Webber.

Spoiler:

Post #8 » by **trex_8063** » Fri Feb 20, 2015 4:42 am

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).

Webber is not an ideal #1, and I don't know how willingly he'd take on a #2 role. But he's a very versatile offensive skill-set, and based on the above I would say one could certainly do worse for a #1 option.

And where Webber's defense is concerned, I feel his short-comings (such as they were) get overstated on this forum. To hear many talk about it, it seems like he's getting pigeon-holed defensively with guys like David Lee, Amar'e Stoudemire, and Carlos Boozer......which I don't think is at all fair. Here are his dRAPM's by year (PI, except where indicated by *):

'97*: +1.62
'98: +2.04
'99: +2.00
'00: +0.23
'01*: +2.2
'02: +1.1
'03: +0.5
'04*: +0.9
'05*: -0.4

Really, that's pretty overwhelmingly positive.

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 Tony Parker (#81), and Kevin Durant (#36).

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....

Spoiler:

Vote: Chris Webber.

Post #9 » by **Clyde Frazier** » Fri Feb 20, 2015 7:09 am

[For the most part, this is what i’ve posted before, but tweaked a little and added a section on carmelo vs. webber as well]

Vote for #84 - Carmelo Anthony

- 12 year career
- 6x all NBA (2 2nd, 4 3rd)
- 1 top 3 and 1 top 10 MVP finish
- 1x scoring champ

REG SEASON 06-14

26.3 PPG, 6.7 RPG, 3.2 APG, 1.1 SPG, .5 BPG, 46.1% FG, 35.3% 3PT, 81.7% FT, 55.4% TS, .149 WS/48, 110 ORTG, 10.9% TO

PLAYOFFS 06-13

27 PPG, 7.4 RPG, 2.8 APG, 1.3 SPG, .4 BPG, 42.1% FG, 32.9% 3PT, 82.8% FT, 51.9% TS, .124 WS/48, 107 ORTG, 9.9% TO

Peak carmelo developed into one of the best offensive players in the league. The “iso melo” stigma really became an outdated narrative as you saw all he really needed was a decent PG rotation to keep the ball moving (a little different, but billups certainly got the best out of him in denver). He became one of the better off the ball players in 12-13, actually shooting more efficiently and on higher volume than durant in catch and shoot situations. His transition to a great 3 pt shooter also opened up his game, and he stepped into transition 3s about as well as anyone in the league.

He’s obviously known for his great post up and face up game, but not acknowledged as much for being a great offensive rebounder for his position. He has a deceptively quick 2nd jump and soft touch around the rim for put backs. He also possesses a unique rolling spin move to the hoop i’m not sure anyone else in the league has. The one thing he’s really average at is finishing at the rim, and i’d say that partially has to do with him not being able to take advantage of the way the game is called these days. He isn’t a freak show athlete like lebron, and he doesn’t have those long strides like durant / harden where they know the angles and draw fouls as easily as they do.

Carmelo had the full repertoire going with his career high 62 pts against charlotte last season (they ranked 5th in DRTG):

Spoiler:

I then look at someone like dominique, who was voted in at #61, and I think a 20+ spot gap between the two is pushing it. Take a look at how they compare over their first 11 seasons (dominique actually comes off as worse if you look at his whole career):

http://bkref.com/tiny/KSWoH

They’re very comparable in most areas, and carmelo actually comes out as the better postseason performer, something wilkins was well criticized for, but still managed to get voted in much earlier.

Looking at carmelo vs. webber, it’s definitely close. Here’s how they performed over their first 11 seasons:

http://bkref.com/tiny/rlHmC

Carmelo has average durability over the course of his career, but has never suffered significant injuries that have kept him out for long periods of a season. Webber missed 28 games in 95, 67 games in 96, 28 games in 02, and 59 games in 04. This was all by the time he hit 30 years old.

And yes, carmelo has lingering knee issues this year, but it’s a lost season, and i’d at least apply some some context to the situation. If he were in a playoff push, maybe this would’ve been dealt with earlier, or he would’ve been playing through it it anyway. I expect him to come back healthy next season.

Compound webber’s lack of durability with his uneven playoff resume, and this is where I see carmelo separating himself from webber. I don’t think his ability as an above average passing big makes up for it. You could give him an edge defensively as a mobile big, but again, his performance on that end was uneven as well.

Just getting hypothetical for a minute, but looking at the 02 kings, this would actually be a great fit for carmelo in the league we’ve come to know over the last few seasons.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAC/2002.html

While you’d lose the traditional PF in webber, caremlo thrived at the 4 in 2013, and having above average size SFs in peja and turkoglu would help on that front. I think the ball movement centric offense they ran would bring out the best in carmelo, and it was a more talented team than what he had in 2013.

There always seemed to be this all or nothing evaluation of carmelo where he’d be expected to be as good as lebron / durant (which he obviously isn’t), or he’s barely a top 20 player in the league. You may want to fault him for forcing his way to NY, but let’s not pretend like many players voted in already haven’t done the same.

ronnymac brings up a good point about low turnovers being a plus for high usage players. Below are are 20+ PPG scorers in the playoffs (excluding centers) sorted by TO% (best to worst):

http://bkref.com/tiny/HO11E

Of course there are guys at the “bottom” who were very successful, but the lower TO% can help offset some of the decrease in efficiency we see with carmelo in the playoffs. 25 of the 34 players on this list have already been voted in, and only 1 of those players (gus williams) has played in more playoff games then carmelo, so I think he has a good case for this spot.

As an aside, I think it’s pretty interesting to see guys like jordan and iverson with such low TO%s in the playoffs. Also would’ve never known ben gordon was a 20 PPG scorer in the playoffs for his career :lol:

Then we get to the clutch play. 82games.com looked at shot data from 04-09 in the reg season + 04-08 in the post season. Carmelo was 6th in the league in game winners, but #1 in the league by far in FG% on game winners at 48.1%:

http://82games.com/gamewinningshots.htm

By 2011, he already had enough game winners to choose from to create a top 10 for his career:

Spoiler:

For clutch data from 2000-2012, carmelo was 7th in the league in FG%, and 50% of his FGs were assisted, which is interesting to note for being criticized for holding the ball too long.

I don’t think you (not you personally) can fall on the criticism of him not being able to fit with better players. International play doesn’t equal the NBA, but he’s always shined in that role. If he really had a problem with making that adjustment, he wouldn’t have been a key player on the last 2 olympic teams. And yes, few players get to play with say lebron or chris paul, but there’s little doubt in my mind that carmelo would thrive in a situation like that.

[I’d obviously prefer eFG% or TS% for these figures, but they weren’t available here]

I’m aware that he hasn’t been quite as clutch over the last few seasons, but i attribute some of that to fatigue (he led the league in MPG last season) and the makeup of his teams. He’s still had his fair share of clutch moments since coming to NY, and hit multiple game winners during his first season here. He did give us this gem in 2012, as well:

Spoiler:

Carmelo gets a decent amount of flack for his playoff resume, and I think it’s a little overstated, so I’d like to provide some context for each season. It also seems to get pushed aside that making the playoffs 10 seasons in a row is no big deal or something, especially when the majority of them came out west. Below is carmelo’s team SRS rank and the opponent’s SRS rank that he lost to in the playoffs.

CARMELO SRS RANK / OPPONENT SRS RANK

04 - 11th / 2nd
05 - 10th / 1st (eventual NBA champion spurs)
06 - 15th / 9th
07 - 9th / 1st (eventual NBA champion spurs)
08 - 11th / 2nd
09 - 8th / 3rd (eventual NBA champion lakers)
10 - 8th / 3rd
11 - 15th / 6th
12 - 11th / 4th (eventual NBA champion heat)
13 - 7th / 9th

Aside from 2013, the team he lost to has always been favored in SRS, with 4 of the 10 series losses coming to the eventual NBA champs. To me, this doesn’t reflect a player who’s come up short when he’s been expected to go farther in the playoffs. You can make the argument that if he was a better player, he may have been favored in more series, but that only goes so far. It’s clear that he hasn’t been as fortunate as some other players as far as who he’s played with. Some more details on his recent playoff loses:

09 - This run to the WCF almost gets glossed over at times. Nuggets were 2 wins away from the finals, losing to the eventual NBA champion lakers, who were just flat out the better team. He had some great performances during that run.

11 - Billups gets hurt in game 1 against boston (out for rest of series), then amare gets hurt in game 2 only playing 17 min. First 2 games are decided by 2 and 3 points respectively. Tony douglas forced to play PG for the rest of the series, basically putting it out of reach.

12 - Disastrous # of injuries. Tyson chandler finishes off a DPOY season, and of course gets the flu as soon as the playoffs start. Lin doesn’t come back for the playoffs, shumpert and douglas only play 1 game a piece, baron davis eventually goes down, and the knicks are only left with 33 yr old mike bibby to run the point, who already had 1 foot in retirement.

13 - First time since carmelo came to the knicks that they really looked like a team who could make a run to the finals. PG play was always an issue prior to this season, and felton came up big in the 1st round against boston. Ball movement flowing with kidd and prigioni as well. Then in the 2nd round against indiana, chandler again doesn’t look himself, which would later be revealed that he had an “undisclosed illness” during the series. I think there’s a good chance they beat the pacers with a healthy chandler, and who knows what happens from there.

Here are the best players carmelo’s played with over the course of his career: andre miller (first few seasons of carmelo's career), kenyon martin (often injured), post 30s iverson, camby (often injured), JR smith, nene (often injured), billups, afflalo, amare (often injured), tyson chandler (often injured), kidd in his last season and an in shape felton. Outside of iverson, that’s a collection of good players, but nothing that screams "consistent second option", or even "consistent first option" if you want to push carmelo down a notch. Fit is clearly important, too, and while iverson and carmelo never had "problems" with each other, it wasn't working. It’s not an accident that carmelo’s best seasons came with billups running the show in 09 and a knicks team in 2013 which focused heavily on keeping the ball moving and quick decision making.

With regards to how carmelo’s career is perceived, I always go back to pierce before garnett and allen came along. Even if we agree that pierce is the better player, he had only been to the conf finals once before that trade, and i’m not sure how his career progresses without those trades being made. Does he stick with it in boston and not make anymore playoff runs? Does he eventually go to another team? I just wonder how carmelo would be looked at had he been fortunate enough to play with teammates of that caliber.

I don’t think you can fall on the criticism of him not being able to fit with better players. International play doesn’t equal the NBA, but he’s always shined in that role. If he really had a problem with making that adjustment, he wouldn’t have been a key player on the last 2 olympic teams. And yes, few players get to play with say lebron or chris paul, but there’s little doubt in my mind that carmelo would thrive in a situation like that.

Post #10 » by **trex_8063** » Sat Feb 21, 2015 12:01 am

penbeast0 wrote:Let me compare Mel Daniels to Chris Webber.

Obviously Webber played in a stronger league and has a strong longevity edge. Equally obvious is Daniel's was far more respected as a dominant force and team leader as shown by his two MVP awards.

Scoring: Webber career 28.3 pp100pos on .513ts%; Daniels career 21.4 pp100po on .507ts% (in a faster paced league that was less efficient). Clear advantage Webber.

Defense: Daniels was a physical force in the post and an intimidating bruiser on opponents driving the lane; Webber was not a good post defender but was much quicker and able to guard away from the basket more easily. Daniels's team defenses tended to be better than Webber's but that's a very noisy stat.

Rebounding: Daniels pulls down 17.3 reb100poss, Webber only 13.4 despite Daniels playing next to superior rebounders (Neto, McGinnis, Hillman v. Charles Jones, Muresan, Divac). Clear advantage Webber.

Playmaking: Webber was a terrific passer (5.8/100poss); Daniels average at best (2.8/100poss). Clear advantage Webber.

Intangibles: Ignoring accolades, Daniels was a coach's favorite and icon in Indiana even today. Webber whined his way out of Golden State and Washington before finding success in Sacramento and had many off court issues as well. Webber also is probably the single player in NBA history most known for blowing it mentally in the clutch, first in college then in the pros. Clear advantage Daniels.

Hard to find two more contrasting big men. If you believe that a relatively inefficient but high scoring, great passing, average defensive big man is more valuable than an average efficiency for his day, great rebounding, physical defender or you feel that early ABA greats (of whom Daniels, Hawkins, and Haywood were the 3 main stars) wouldn't translate to other eras, then you support Webber. If you value intangibles and a winning (3 ABA titles in his prime) and feel that physical intimidating bigs are a key to success then you can support Mel Daniels.

You know which side I am on.

And obviously we're both going to be focusing more on the things that favor our candidate, which I'll do below

, but I'll throw a bone for Daniels, too.....

I'm pretty sure you meant to say "Clear advantage Daniels" under the rebounding category. bbref only has the per 100 numbers for his post-prime. fwiw, I went and made estimates for his rebounds/100 possessions for the other years:

'68: 18.5
'69: 18.4
'70: 21.6
'71: 20.7
'72: 18.9
'73: 17.1

Those are pretty beastly (lower shooting %'s likely led to more rebounds to be had, though we also need to consider that when scrutinizing shooting efficiency and scoring----which is why I generally like to include RELATIVE ts%). His overall career avg was probably more like ~18.5 reb/100 possessions.

So yeah, clear advantage to Daniels in rebounding (more substantial than previously thought, in fact).

However, I want to point out a couple things regarding weight or importance placed on various aspects.
You've noted that defense and rebounding are perhaps the most important features you need/want in a center ("hey! and look: those are the things Daniels is best at!"). But Webber was largely NOT playing the C position. He was a PF. At the PF, would say that scoring (where even you gave Webber a clear edge) and rebounding are the most important features in a PF, and I'd like list defense third, where again, I think Webber get's underrated. He may have been a touch soft as a low post defender, but his athleticism allowed for some pretty good help D (career 1.44 bpg and 1.44 spg), and he pretty consistently had a positive dRAPM (sometimes fairly significantly so).

And then passing very significantly in Webber's favor. I also give Webber edges for longevity and strength of league/era (the latter not exactly a small consideration for me).

Post #11 » by **penbeast0** » Sat Feb 21, 2015 5:40 am

Good analysis and again, I could see it go either way depending on what you value most in a big but although lower shooting % leads to more rebounds, it doesn't lead to a greater rebound percentage since that is the percentage of available rebounds that that player grabbed.

And, you didn't mention intangibles which is where I think Webber falls down most significantly. His butting heads with coaches in GS and Washington (and issues at the end of his career too though those aren't very significant to his career value); his off court problems including the perjury, partying, and practice habits; his famous chokes in key moments; and his tendency to whine to the media and me first rather than team first attitude together compose a pretty large pill to swallow. That's where Daniels's 2 MVPS, hero status in Indianapolis, and rep as an intimidating force come in; to contrast the respect he was held in to the perception of Webber.

Post #12 » by **trex_8063** » Sat Feb 21, 2015 7:27 pm

Boy, another weak turn-out; thru post #11:

Mel Daniels (1) - penbeast0

Chris Webber (3) - SactoKingsFan, trex_8063, ronnymac2

Horace Grant (1) - Quotatious

Rasheed Wallace (1) - jaivl

Carmelo Anthony (1) - Clyde Frazier

Post #13 » by **Doctor MJ** » Sat Feb 21, 2015 8:10 pm

Vote Sheed

There's never going to be a time where there aren't good arguments against Sheed because of his attitude but no one denies his massive talent, and the +- data tells us that despite the attitude he had consistent massive impact more like Kobe than Webber

Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Post #14 » by **Moonbeam** » Sat Feb 21, 2015 8:15 pm

Don't have much time, but I'll throw in a vote for Horace Grant. Quotatious covered it well - this guy was the muscle inside for that first Bull 3-peat, and he was great after Jordan retired, too. He was a very good all-around player - decent scorer on usually decent efficiency (peaking with a Score+ of 2.866 in 1992, a couple other seasons well north of 1 and a career average of 0.280), very good rebounder and defender, and as a third wheel, he really seemed to know how to play off the top 2 guys and when to make a more direct impact.

In the playoffs, he upped his game considerably (Score+ of 1.188, and a jaw-dropping O+ of 16.77, even for a "role player"). I think he's well worth a look here.

Notanoob · Post #15 » by **Notanoob** » Sat Feb 21, 2015 8:26 pm

Since Walton is getting no love, I'll throw in my vote for Rasheed Wallace. Stupid good versatility, a really complete game. He'd improve nearly every team in history by throwing him in at either big spot. Can operate in the post or shooting jumpers, can anchor a defense and guard the paint, but is also mobile enough to cover quick power forwards. Beloved by his teammates.

Post #16 » by **Quotatious** » Sat Feb 21, 2015 9:15 pm

Moonbeam wrote:Don't have much time, but I'll throw in a vote for Horace Grant. Quotatious covered it well - this guy was the muscle inside for that first Bull 3-peat, and he was great after Jordan retired, too. He was a very good all-around player - decent scorer on usually decent efficiency (peaking with a Score+ of 2.866 in 1992, a couple other seasons well north of 1 and a career average of 0.280), very good rebounder and defender, and as a third wheel, he really seemed to know how to play off the top 2 guys and when to make a more direct impact.

In the playoffs, he upped his game considerably (Score+ of 1.188, and a jaw-dropping O+ of 16.77, even for a "role player"). I think he's well worth a look here.

Nice to see another Grant voter. Knowing that you previously voted for Cheeks, I'm not surprised to see that you like Horace, too (these two are very similar - actually, I'd say that Cheeks can even be considered a point guard version of Grant).

Notanoob wrote:Since Walton is getting no love, I'll throw in my vote for Rasheed Wallace. Stupid good versatility, a really complete game. He'd improve nearly every team in history by throwing him in at either big spot. Can operate in the post or shooting jumpers, can anchor a defense and guard the paint, but is also mobile enough to cover quick power forwards. Beloved by his teammates.

I feel like Walton should definitely make the list, his peak was just too special not to include him, but it's very difficult to decide where he belongs. I can tell you value peaks heavily (I can understand it, certainly, although I'm more of a longevity, or an extended prime, guy).

Sheed is pretty high on my shortlist of candidates, too, but Grant seems to have a bit better longevity (at least if higher career WS and VORP mean anything), and superior intangibles/attitude, plus he's the better rebounder and passer (better in the playoffs, too). Sheed was definitely more of a star on the offensive end, because of his versatility as a scorer (it's nice that he had a 3-point shot, too - there are very few guys who can space the floor like he could, and defend at an elite level - that's a rare combination - most stretch bigs are usually poor defensively).

Post #17 » by **trex_8063** » Sat Feb 21, 2015 9:37 pm

A small flurry of activity, and now thru post #16:

Mel Daniels (1) - penbeast0

Chris Webber (3) - SactoKingsFan, trex_8063, ronnymac2

Horace Grant (2) - Quotatious, moonbeam

Rasheed Wallace (3) - jaivl, Doctor MJ, Notanoob

Carmelo Anthony (1) - Clyde Frazier

Post #18 » by **Moonbeam** » Sat Feb 21, 2015 9:57 pm

Notanoob wrote:Since Walton is getting no love, I'll throw in my vote for Rasheed Wallace. Stupid good versatility, a really complete game. He'd improve nearly every team in history by throwing him in at either big spot. Can operate in the post or shooting jumpers, can anchor a defense and guard the paint, but is also mobile enough to cover quick power forwards. Beloved by his teammates.

I'm definitely open to a Walton vote.

Post #19 » by **penbeast0** » Sat Feb 21, 2015 10:06 pm

Looks like Rasheed v. Webber . . . I tend to favor Rasheed Wallace though not particularly fond of his inconsistent energy, less than stellar rebounding, or his fathead technicals. But, I will leave my vote open for the moment pending some straightforward comparisons.

Post #20 » by **trex_8063** » Sat Feb 21, 2015 11:29 pm

trex_8063 wrote:
I'm pretty sure you meant to say "Clear advantage Daniels" under the rebounding category. bbref only has the per 100 numbers for his post-prime. fwiw, I went and made estimates for his rebounds/100 possessions for the other years:

'68: 18.5
'69: 18.4
'70: 21.6
'71: 20.7
'72: 18.9
'73: 17.1

Not to derail, but this just got me curious what Bill Russell's estimated Rebs per 100 possessions would be; so I went ahead and figured it out:

'57: 22.6
'58: 22.8
'59: 20.2
'60: 19.9
'61: 19.3
'62: 19.1
'63: 19.9
'64: 21.3
'65: 21.0
'66: 20.7
'67: 20.4
'68: 19.5
'69: 18.4

Overall career avg per 100 probably just over 20 (like around 20.2).

That's pretty amazing considering he did it while simultaneously being a big-time shot blocking threat.