Re: RealGM Top 100 List #85

Post #1 » by **penbeast0** » Sun Feb 22, 2015 11:04 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).

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** » Sun Feb 22, 2015 11:04 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.

Post #3 » by **trex_8063** » Sun Feb 22, 2015 11:20 pm

Alright! I can't wait to see who will be the next chap to beat Webber in a run-off. :-?

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.

ronnymac2 · Post #4 » by **ronnymac2** » Sun Feb 22, 2015 11:24 pm

Vote: Chris Webber

Still not confident voting for Webber, but nobody else stands out. I do think Webber had an LMA-type effect on offense with solid defense. Probably the most creative passer at PF ever. 20/10 threat who could post. He did play well in the 2002 playoffs.

SactoKingsFan · Post #5 » by **SactoKingsFan** » Mon Feb 23, 2015 12:30 am

VOTE: CHRIS WEBBER

viewtopic.php?p=42740421#p42740421

Other players I'd like to vote for after Webber:

Richmond
Bosh
Mullin
Porter
Kemp
Stoudemire
Dumars

Owly · Post #6 » by **Owly** » Mon Feb 23, 2015 12:41 am

penbeast0 wrote: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.

Where I am on Webber versus Daniels.

I can see why people are supporting each. Based on accolades and team achievements Daniels has a very impresive resume, and Webber gave a very rounded boxscore contribution.

I'm, I guess, somewhat cyncial (or at least down) on both though. For Daniels, it has been alluded to here in terms of translating, for me there is a concern about early ABA bigs. Hawkins and Haywood didn't replicate their numbers in the NBA (though they were good), these were PFs fwiw (though Haywood an ABA center, maybe that says something ...). But at a direct C comparison it comes down to Zelmo. Zelmo looks like Daniels' equal in the ABA (numerically slightly better, otoh) and has an NBA career good enough to clearly push his total career value over Daniels (for me) whilst . Competition wise versus Johnston (which has come up) I don't know how you'd go about comparing the competition in raw (time travel) terms, but Johnston was for a spell better than the best of his day (Foust, Macauley, early Lovellette; by metrics and accolades) whereas Daniels played in a league in which was, for a few years, decidedly 2nd tier (Red Robbins and Byron Beck rather than Chamberlain, Russell, Reed, Bellamy then Jabbar etc). I guess the other place where I'm differing is in non-boxscore stuff and in particular D. You've alluded to Alonzo, and whilst I think Daniels was his team's best defender (and I'm basing this off limited info), I don't get that intimidator-anchor vibe from Daniels (though tbf I considered phrasing that "I don't imagine ..." which shows how limited the information is).

On Webber he's just got a lot of things that got a lot of the stuff that gets a guy overrated. Volume scoring, arrival impact narrative (not that impact stuff isn't useful, but there was near enough a whole team turned over as he arrived in Sacramento, and with the addition of Williams there was a lot of hype about a pretty average team), boxscore D better than actual defensive impact,

There was a thread a while ago about elite historical prospects and I'll stand by what I said in terms of I don't think he was regarded as one nor should he have been (even from college you'd have to be super bullish about his defensive potential and shooting to regard him as elite). But he was a consensus number one. And he had a lot of tools. And he posted 21.7 PER and .154 WS/48 as a rookie (21st and 65th all-time). But that year both flashed both what he could have been and makes me wonder why he wasn't. Why did he drop so much weight, why did he resent playing C (and being pushed, though I don't love Nellie by this point so I guess there's shared blame here), why did he pull the me-or-him ultimatum (after a 50 win season, with Mullin the oldest player on that years squad at 30, Hardaway and Marcuilionis to come back - well Ricky Pierce instead of Roony by that time, Pierce coming off a prolific per minute scoring year, Mullin set to play a full docket etc), why couldn't he fit with Sheed in Washington, why did he feud with Peja. The injury he couldn't help, but there's too much off the court stuff, the perjury, the drugs that make him difficult to build around (the same "liability" principle I had with Rodman though obviously not to nearly that degree). There's the way he shaped his game (becoming high usage and middling to low efficiency, staying away from the basket, reducing his rebounds) which combined with pre-existing basketball issues (ft shooting, reluctance to fight for position on D) that's an issue.

I'm not sure there's a huge contention window there (with Webber as "star") and the with-without stuff, even at his peak, doesn't suggest a huge, star type impact ('02 which I thought of as his peak is the most surprising - obviously there's noise and sample size issues with these things, but it doesn't help).

All that said I can see why Webber is getting support here.

andrewww · Post #7 » by **andrewww** » Mon Feb 23, 2015 3:54 am

Does Penny Hardaway at least warrant discussion at this spot? I'd make the argument that at their peaks, Penny vs. CWebb leaves room for a reasonable debate.

Post #8 » by **trex_8063** » Mon Feb 23, 2015 3:18 pm

andrewww wrote:Does Penny Hardaway at least warrant discussion at this spot? I'd make the argument that at their peaks, Penny vs. CWebb leaves room for a reasonable debate.

If your criteria leans toward peak-heavy, Penny certainly belongs in the debate. He's quite easily well inside the top 100 peaks, and I would probably rank his peak at least slightly ahead of Webber's. His longevity/durability is pretty soundly trumped by Webber's, though (not particularly close, even though Webber's isn't great).

Post #9 » by **Clyde Frazier** » Mon Feb 23, 2015 4:15 pm

Vote for #85 - 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.

http://bit.ly/1wnySdJ

[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 **Quotatious** » Mon Feb 23, 2015 5:13 pm

andrewww wrote:Does Penny Hardaway at least warrant discussion at this spot? I'd make the argument that at their peaks, Penny vs. CWebb leaves room for a reasonable debate.

Totally depends on your criteria. In terms of peak, I'd take Hardaway over Webber, quite handily. However, as trex said, Webber's longevity/durability is clearly better than Penny's.

Penny is like a less extreme version of Bill Walton - he also peaked very high (not as high as Bill, obviously, but I think he has the second highest peak among players who hasn't been selected yet - rookie Walt Bellamy and Spencer Haywood may be debatable, but 1996 Hardaway's greatness is undeniable - the thing is, Penny's longevity is better than Bill's).

Most voters here just prefer to vote for players who had long, consistent, solid careers (I mean, like 10 seasons as a borderline All-Star or an elite role player), over guys with very high peaks, but relatively little overall career value, due to injuries.

Post #11 » by **Quotatious** » Mon Feb 23, 2015 5:14 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 (Moonbeam, RayBan-Sematra, come on guys, vote for him again

)

Owly · Post #12 » by **Owly** » Mon Feb 23, 2015 7:13 pm

Quotatious wrote:So, if Grant can be mostly considered a "super role player" ...

Like Tim Duncan :wink:

Post #13 » by **penbeast0** » Mon Feb 23, 2015 9:55 pm

Owly wrote:
penbeast0 wrote: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.

Where I am on Webber versus Daniels.

I can see why people are supporting each. Based on accolades and team achievements Daniels has a very impresive resume, and Webber gave a very rounded boxscore contribution.

You seem to be the only one. Out on a very lonely island with Daniels here.

My next two are probably Chris Mullin and Jerry Lucas off the top of my head and they aren't getting much mention either though Horace Grant probably should be in ahead of Lucas, I admit. Probably will never get around to mentioning Bob Dandridge, lol.

RayBan-Sematra · Post #14 » by **RayBan-Sematra** » Tue Feb 24, 2015 12:13 am

Tim Hardaway
----------------
7 year Prime : 20 / 9apg / 2spg on 54%TS
Playoff over those 7 years : 22 / 8 / 2 on 53%TS
Also has a decent Rookie year : 15 / 9 on 53%TS

Don't like that he doesn't have any good extended ps runs.

Then again at this point of the project that probably doesn't matter as much.
Plus in fairness he did face the Knicks & the Bulls in that run. Pretty brutal defenses.
Oddly enough though his worst series came against ORL in round one. Penny went crazy in that series.

Post #15 » by **trex_8063** » Tue Feb 24, 2015 7:18 pm

Thru post #14:

Mel Daniels (1) - penbeast0

Chris Webber (3) - trex_8063, ronnymac2, SactoKingsFan

Carmelo Anthony (1) - Clyde Frazier

Horace Grant (1) - Quotatious

Tim Hardaway (1) - RayBan-Sematra

Post #16 » by **Clyde Frazier** » Tue Feb 24, 2015 10:46 pm

Carter voted in at 60

Nique voted in at 61

King voted in at 70

What is really separating carmelo from these guys by 15-20+ spots? Carter and nique were more prolific at the rim, and carter was a better playmaker, but their overall careers are pretty similar compared to carmelo. King was the highly efficient dynamic scoring force at his peak, but has clear longevity and durability issues. And again, all 3 have gotten in 15-20+ spots earlier, so all things considered, i’d say carmelo is more than deserving here.

Post #17 » by **penbeast0** » Wed Feb 25, 2015 1:13 am

OK, will change my vote to Horace Grant as, other than Daniels, he's the only one I can see playing the key role he played in actual life on a true championship contender. I think the other three tend to be the kind of players that can really look great on a bad team but on a championship team, their flaws as volume scorers tend to get magnified.

So, we get the runoff of Chris Webber v. Horace Grant.

Post #18 » by **trex_8063** » Wed Feb 25, 2015 3:21 am

Clyde Frazier wrote:Carter voted in at 60

Nique voted in at 61

King voted in at 70

What is really separating carmelo from these guys by 15-20+ spots? Carter and nique were more prolific at the rim, and carter was a better playmaker, but their overall careers are pretty similar compared to carmelo. King was the highly efficient dynamic scoring force at his peak, but has clear longevity and durability issues. And again, all 3 have gotten in 15-20+ spots earlier, so all things considered, i’d say carmelo is more than deserving here.

Vince Carter: Carter peaked higher, and at least a little better overall throughout respective primes. They way I see their respective games: Carter was very nearly as good a volume scorer (I'm giving Melo the tiny edge, though); rebounding (relative to positional norms) I'd call a wash; I'd rate Carter at least a little better play-maker, even relative to positional expectations; and Carter's definitely the better and more willing defender. So I rate Carter the slightly better overall player. I think his game is a touch more portable, able to fit better in a variety of situations, too. Quick look at said primes:

Vinsanity ('00-'07)
Per 100 possessions: 34.7 pts, 7.6 reb, 5.9 ast, 1.8 stl, 1.1 blk, 3.4 tov @ 53.6% ts (+1.1% to league avg)
PER 22.2, .158 WS/48, 109 ORtg/105 DRtg (+4), BPM +4.5 in 37.8 mpg. cumulative VORP 35.5.

Melo ('06-'14)---he does have one extra season of true prime-level play to his credit
Per 100 possessions: 36.5 pts, 9.3 reb, 4.4 ast, 1.5 stl, 0.7 blk, 4.0 tov @ 55.4% ts (+1.5% to league avg)
PER 22.1, .149 WS/48, 110 ORtg/107 DRtg (+3), BPM +1.8 in 36.7 mpg. cumulative VORP 22.3.

RAPM data rates Carter about how you'd expect, if not better (that is: very well), but is not very flattering at all to Melo (using PI where ever possible, btw):

Best 3 years
Carter: +13.31
Anthony: +5.52

Best 5 years
Carter: +20.12
Anthony: +6.91

Best 7 years
Carter: +26.26
Anthony: +7.42

Best 10 years
Carter: +34.38
Anthony: +6.46

So not necessarily a big margin, but I think Carter clearly a little better in respective primes; and although Melo's prime is marginally longer, outside of primes Carter's got FOUR* additional AS/borderline AS-caliber role player seasons (vs zero for Melo), as well as a handful of other valuable role player years.

*Outside of his prime years cited above, Carter's got FOUR seasons where he a) avg >30 mpg, b) has PER of at least 17.1, and c) WS/48 of at least .123. He's got one other year with PER of 17.8 and WS/48 of .137 (at 25.8 mpg).

So basically Carter's the marginally better player, and (at this point, at least) has a significant longevity edge when factoring all these value-added role player and borderline AS seasons.

Dominique Wilkins
I do think Melo and Nique make a pretty good comparison. Similar player types in many ways; I probably give Nique a slight edge as an overall player, but it's very close.

Here's Nique's prime ('86-'94) stats to compare to Melo's:
Per 100 possessions: 36.9 pts, 9.3 reb, 3.8 ast, 1.9 stl, 0.8 blk, 3.4 tov @ 54.4% ts (+0.8% to league avg)
PER 23.2, .173 WS/48, 114 ORtg/109 DRtg (+5), BPM +3.4 in 37.4 mpg. cumulative VORP 33.7.

So it's pretty close, but does appear at least marginally better than Melo's statistically, and is the same length, too. And then Nique's got several more role player years. Thus, similar to Carter, it's mostly a longevity edge +/- perhaps marginally better player in his prime.

Bernard King
Yeah......there I don't know what to tell you; I don't rank King higher than Melo, personally. I def think he peaked higher than Melo, and I believe he was better in '84 and '85 than Melo has ever been: he was scoring at similar volume as Melo but at significantly better efficiency, and was probably a marginally better defender, too, while being only a slightly lesser as a playmaker and rebounder.
But that being said......with that injury, his prime is so short (relatively)---I know I tend to value longevity more than many---that it's simply hard for me to consider him Melo's equal in total career value. He's got so little playoff resume to speak of, too, though I know that's not entirely up to him.

Anyway, that's my 2c on the guys mentioned......
fwiw, I agree Melo could/should go in any time now. There's just a couple guys I'm inclined to lend support before I'm going to speak on Melo's behalf.

Post #19 » by **Doctor MJ** » Wed Feb 25, 2015 4:20 am

Runoff Vote: Grant

Honestly I'm rather hoping Webber takes this, but the arguments people have made about Grant are solid. He's the type of player I'd love to have for a team, whereas obviously I'm reluctant to have Webber in anything like the role that he's being celebrated for here.

JordansBulls · Post #20 » by **JordansBulls** » Wed Feb 25, 2015 5:27 am

Vote: Chris Webber (multiple time allstar, best player on a championship contending team, was also voted as part of the next top 10 of the top 50 all time.) I am not sure how Grant is even being considered for this.