"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd "Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
1st ballot: Elgin Baylor '61 To some degree the volume vs. efficiency considerations of Baylor (among others from this era) should be viewed with a bit of leniency, imo, as efficiency and "finding a good shot" just wasn't on anyone's radar in the early 1960's. And at any rate '61 Baylor was significantly above league avg efficiency (especially in the playoffs, where he shot a TS% that would be decent even by today's standards, despite lack of 3pt line, decent spacing, or restrictions on hand-checking). Any way you slice it, Baylor was an excellent (if not quite elite) scorer, and underrated playmaker for the SF position, as well as a GOAT-level rebounder for his position, and likely a better defender than some of the perimeter players voted in recently (e.g. Nash or Harden).
Baylor '61 rs per 100 possession estimates: 31.1 pts, 17.75 reb, 4.55 ast @ +2.91% rTS. 28.2 PER, .227 WS/48 in 42.9 mpg Baylor '61 playoff per 100 possession estimates: 32.5 pts, 13.1 reb, 3.9 ast @ +6.89% rTS (53.83% TS, which would be a little above average even by today's standards). 28.0 PER, .248 WS/48 in 45.0 mpg
Some additional stuff about prime Baylor in general (copied from prior thread):
Spoiler:
Here's some more info regarding Baylor's impact, draw your own conclusions.....
In '58 (before Baylor), the Lakers were 19-53 (.264) with an SRS of -5.78.
In '59 they obtain rookie Elgin Baylor (and he's the only relevant transaction that occurred), and improve to 33-39 (.458) and -1.42 SRS (improvement of 14 wins and +4.36 SRS). They would also make it to the finals by first defeating a -1.36 SRS Detroit team 2-1, and then defeating the +2.89 SRS defending champ St. Louis Hawks 4-2. wrt to how that improvement was managed...... Yeah, we always tend to think of Baylor as primarily an offensive player; but there's some to suggest he had a significant impact defensively, too. His reputation is mostly as a "decent" (but not great) defender, though I wonder if perhaps his prowess on the glass reduced a lot of easy second-chance opportunities for opponents (he was 3rd in the league in rebounds right off the bat in his rookie season). Because in terms of rORTG, the Lakers in '58 (before Baylor) were -0.8 (ranked 6th of 8), and in rDRTG were +4.5 (8th of 8, and +2.5 to the 7th place team!). In '59, their rORTG improves to +0.6 (a jump of 1.4, up to 4th of 8); but rDRTG improves to +1.7 (a big jump of 2.8, from a distant last place to 6th of 8). The team is 33-37 (.471) with him, 0-2 without him.
In '60, an aging Vern Mikkelsen has retired, aging Larry Foust misses some games and is playing a reduced role, too. Meanwhile the offensive primacy of the wildly inefficient (even for the era) Hot Rod Hundley increases, as well as a marginally increase in role for the even worse Slick Leonard (ridiculously bad 37.3% TS.....that's even -9% relative to league avg; similar to someone shooting 44% TS or so today; you'd have to be an elite defender to get ANY playing time at all today, and no way would you be getting 28+ mpg and be 6th on the team in FGA/g.....goes to show how efficiency just wasn't on the radar yet). And they also obtained rookie Rudy LaRusso (who would eventually become a pretty good player, but is a fairly inefficient scorer in his rookie season). They also obtained the somewhat inefficient Frank Selvy as well as an aging 6'11" Ray Felix in mid-season trades. Anyway, their rORTG falls to -3.4 (8th of 8), though their defense continues to improve to +0.1 rDRTG (4th of 8), as they finish 25-50 (-4.14 SRS). The team is 23-47 (.329) with him, 2-3 (.400) without him.
In '61, we have the arrival of rookie Jerry West. He's not yet the player he would become, but nonetheless is the clear 2nd-best behind Baylor. This affords them to reduce the role of Hundley and Leonard in the backcourt. rORTG improves to -1.3 (7th of 8), rDRTG continues to improve to -1.2 (4th of 8). The team is 34-39 (.466) with him, 2-4 (.333) without him.
In '62, West is now a legit superstar, too. Slick Leonard is gone, and Hundley's role is further diminished; LaRusso continues to improve and get more efficient. Non-surprisingly, the team rORTG improves to +1.4 (3rd of 9). Critics might argue Baylor missing games contributed to this improvement in rORTG, but I'm more inclined to think it's the additive effects of a) the improvements in West and LaRusso, b) the loss of Leonard, and c) the reduced role of Hundley; especially in light of the following....... Baylor misses 32 games, not due to injury, but rather to military service: he's only able to play if he can get a weekend pass to quickly travel to the game, play, and then come back. So he likely barely gets to practice, and yet still establishes himself among the league's elite---->Per 100 possession estimates: 33.6 pts, 16.3 reb, 4.1 ast @ +1.34% rTS in a whopping 44.4 mpg. The team is 37-11 (.771) with him, 17-15 (.531) without him. Some of his missed games may have overlapped with West's missed games, but the thing is: West only missed 5 games total that year. And NO ONE else in their main rotation missed more than 2 games all year. They make it to the finals and take the Russell Celtics to 7 games. Baylor averages 40.6 ppg, 17.9 rpg, and 3.7 apg in the series @ 51.0% TS (+3.1 rTS). In a close game 5 victory, Baylor logs [what I think is still an NBA finals record] 61 pts (and I believe 22 reb as well).
Going back to our agreement that impact = goodness + fit + utilization......I don't think Baylor was utilized ideally (something that I think is unfortunately true for MANY old era players). Yet there's still several indicators of substantial impact circa his peak, especially in '62.
EDIT: I'd also add this quote from The Rivalry: Bill Russell, Wilt Chamberlain, and the Golden Age of Basketball by John Taylor....
.....Fans specifically came to see him [Baylor]. When he was on military duty and playing sporadically, they called the box office before games to ask if he would be appearing. The Lakers front office had run figures calculating Baylor’s ability to sell tickets, and they determined that in games when he did not play, the Lakers drew an average of 2,000 fewer fans. That amounted to approximately $6,000 per game, or $200,000 over the course of a season….
Correctly utilized, I think Baylor would be the best SF not named Lebron or Kevin Durant today: 1) a scorer capable of maybe 21-22 ppg at around 58% TS on a talent-laden team, or 27+ ppg on ~56% TS if shouldering bigger usage; basically a Carmelo level scorer.... 2) but a better playmaker than Melo (very underrated aspect of Baylor's game) 3) a neutral level defender 4) and possibly the GOAT rebounding SF outside of Shawn Marion (roughly equal to peak Lebron in this regard). To qualify this last, I'm going to bring up CavaliersFTW's recent thread: viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1412184#start_here Also note Baylor's reb/100 possession numbers in '61: 17.75. Compare this to some other notables (mostly centers: including Wilt and Russell) in '61: Wilt Chamberlain '61 - 20.7 Bill Russell '61 - 19.3 Walter Dukes '61 - 19.2 Bob Pettit '61 - 18.9 Wayne Embry '61 - 15.1 Bailey Howell '61 - 14.3 And here are a few other notables from shortly after '61: Walt Bellamy '62 - 17.5 Jerry Lucas---renowned as one of the greatest rebounders or all-time---though not around in '61, in the mid-60's ('64-'67) averaged between 17.4 to 19.1 rebs/100 possessions Gus Johnson only had one year with a reb/100 avg >17.75 (18.3 in '71; he otherwise ranged between 12.7 to 16.6) Dave DeBusschere ranged between 11.8 to 14.3 rebs/100 possessions during his career. BOTTOM LINE: Baylor's rebounding was no joke. He is elite in an all-time sense for his position.
2nd ballot: Kevin McHale '87 I kinda went thru a big comparison between Howard/McHale, which I'll copy in the spoiler; it details my difficulty in deciding between the two:
Spoiler:
McHale vs. Dwight is an interesting comparison...... Offense Peak Dwight is much more athletic and---related to that---is a superior finisher: pretty much devastating when he gets the ball <3 ft from the rim; is basically the GOAT finisher outside of prime Shaq and perhaps peak Robinson (finishing >75% from that range in '10 and '11, despite huge volume there--->like 50+% of his shot load, often going thru 2 or 3 defenders and getting And1's). Has developed a nice little short-range jump hook (with either hand), too. Draws tons of fouls (and was shooting nearly 60% from the FT-line at his peak; which is not good, but not godawful for a big either; getting a 60% ft-shooter to the line is still fairly efficient scoring).
Admittedly, that's where his offensive prowess ends. He has no jump-shot or range to speak of at all, limited repertoire of post-moves, not much of a passer, and a touch turnover prone. Still, I don't mean to imply offensive mediocrity on his part (many of his critics attempt to do so, and it's absolutely untrue, imo). His hands, strength, explosiveness, etc, allow him to be in a GOAT-level tier when he gets the ball near the rim, and that cannot be trivialized. If taking a hack-a-Howard strategy, peak Howard's not as big a liability at the line as most versions of Shaq, Wilt, or Russell. Combined with even his limited post repertoire, this makes him a well-above average offensive player.
McHale, though, has a case for the GOAT where low-post game is concerned. Great footwork, makes excellent use of his lower body to create space and effectively post up to receive the ball in a position to score. Has a myriad of effective moves; I especially like the quick fake followed by the up-and-under for the layup; or the fake shot low-side, fake shot high-side, then (when defend leaves the ground) he ducks back under for the easy layup. And he made these moves quickly, much quicker than you'd think he's capable of when you see him run up the court; he simply doesn't appear as though he could possibly move that fast. He has the short-range jump hooks, the fall-away jumper, was a pretty good finisher despite vastly inferior athleticism (relative to Howard); just very nice soft touch near the rim. Had range out to at least 12-14 ft. And >83% FT-shooter at his peak. Guy was a scoring machine dropping 31.9 pts/100 possessions at 65.5% TS while playing damn near 40 mpg. Now certainly we can acknowledge that Bird's playmaking and the wealth of talent around him helped his efficiency. otoh, it also stole some primacy away from him. I could see peak McHale in other circumstances dropping 28-29 ppg (~36 per 100 poss) at maybe 61-62% TS in that time period. And he's less turnover prone than Dwight, and a bit better passer (when he chose to do so, though he was mostly a black hole if you gave him the ball in the post......not saying that's a bad thing, fwiw, when you consider what the typical result of giving him the ball in the post was).
So offensively, I give McHale a solid edge.
Defense McHale in ‘87 was an All-Defensive 1st Team forward, who often had to spend time guarding outside his position (on the opposing SF) to help hide Bird (though in Bird’s defense: Larry was a fantastic post defender). But that’s just one thing that helps illustrate McHale’s defensive versatility, because he was also an excellent low post defender, and he was also Boston’s primary rim protector, coming up with 2.7 blk/100 possessions.
So despite Dwight’s 3 DPOY awards (which I think marginally overstate his defensive value), I do think it’s close defensively. I probably give the small edge to Dwight, though, based him being sort of the sole anchor to his team’s defense, and the guy that they try to filter everything to. Although in the past I’ve criticized Dwight for his lack of footwork and timing (where it relates to shot-blocking), noting for example that in ‘13 Howard was avg 3.5 blk/100 possessions with a BLK% of 4.9%; meanwhile a 36-yr-old Tim Duncan was avg 4.5 blk/100 possessions with a BLK% of 6.4%. Even though he’s (even after his back surgery) considerably more athletic than a 36-yr-old Duncan, he’s getting soundly trounced in his shot-blocking stats. The primary reason, at least according to my observations, was that Duncan ascribed to (and executed) the fundamentals seen in shot-blockers like Russell and Dikembe, which involves keeping your arms up, moving your feet to stay close to the presumed shooter (so you’re in position to make the easier block), waiting for him to go up with the shot and then going up AFTER him to tip the ball just after it leaves his fingers…..a technique that requires attention to keeping your hands/arms up, footwork and timing; as opposed to relying on outstanding elevation. Dwight has a habit of doing the latter: just sort of vaguely drifting in the direction of a potential shooter, then relying on his outstanding athleticism, gathering himself for a giant leap and batting at the air in region of the arcing shot (occasionally coming up with the amazing grand-standing type of block).
However, I will say something for this method: while strictly speaking it may not be as effective in actually coming up with blocks, it does allow him to CHANGE more shots (because as he’s more just playing a region, rather than a player, he can “get in on” more plays defensively). And I do see Howard change a lot of shots that he doesn’t actually get a paw on.
I’ve also previously criticized this technique of his because it potentially puts him out of position for the defensive rebound; but I think I simply need to retract this criticism, looking at Dwight defensive rebounding numbers (which are obviously hyper-elite).
So overall, I likely give Dwight the small edge defensively.
Rebounding Here Dwight clearly has a sizable edge. Even relative to positional norms and expectations, it’s Dwight by a solid margin. I’ll point out one thing in McHale’s defense on this, however: part of what is depressing his rebounding numbers is what I’d mentioned above about him being forced to defend outside his natural position (guarding SF’s….that is: perimeter players)......this is at times putting him out of position for the defensive rebound.
Intangibles This is sort of vague, and of lesser import. I’ll give McHale the edge here….he just seems like the better teammate, and the more professional and cerebral player.
Durability This is the one that kinda hurts McHale. Based on all of the above, I’d give the small edge to McHale overall…...at least until faced with the reality that in his peak season, McHale’s body did break down and he played thru a serious injury (a friggin’ broken bone, iirc! Guy’s tough as nails) in the playoffs. While still good, even hobbled, he obviously wasn’t the McHale we’d seen throughout the rs. Howard, otoh, was healthy thru both rs and playoffs at his peak. So that’s a consideration which brings the comparison roughly back to parity for me.
Honestly, I’ve gone back on forth on this comparison, and I’m still not sure who I’ll rank in front.
I did ultimately go with Howard based on health (and performance) in the playoffs, but it was really tight for me. With Howard out of the picture, I'm fairly comfortable going with McHale here.
3rd ballot: Connie Hawkins '68 Touch of mystery surrounding early Hawkins, but here is how I see it.....
Physically, he’s listed as 6’8” (and from all photographic evidence I’ve seen, I think he’s a legit 6’8”.....not like a “generously 6’8” in his shoes” type of situation), and 210 lbs on bbref. He’s got a wirey strong build, a pretty long reach, and massive hands (which enable all the one-handed palm pass fakes, crazy sweeping scoop shots, etc):
And he’s got some grace, speed, and ups, as you can get a little sense of from in the videos below, as well as seeing some of the one-handed palming plays (and bear in mind when watching that almost all of that footage is him PAST his physical prime). Overall physically, he’s kinda reminiscent of Scottie Pippen, but with bigger hands.
He’s got some solid mid-range touch (again, see in videos below), and some good handles and passing for a biggish guy (was the original “point forward”, if I’m not mistaken).
Now before we get into what he did in his peak season (‘68), let’s first take a quick look at what he was still capable of in his late 20’s AFTER knee surgery (which I’m sure you’re all aware of how well players were typically able to come back after knee surgery in that day and age). Coming into the NBA as a 28-year-old rookie, one year after knee surgery, he went for a 10th-in-the-league 19.74 PER and .147 WS/48 in 40.9 mpg. His per 100 poss estimates: 24.8 pts, 10.5 reb, 4.85 ast @ +5.16% rTS. And fwiw, he was awarded All-NBA 1st Team honors alongside Billy Cunningham, and ahead of forwards Lou Hudson and Gus Johnson. Did nearly as well (on larger minutes) in the playoffs that year: somewhat inflated by pace, but he avg 25.4 ppg/13.9 rpg/5.9 apg in the ‘70 playoffs.
Again: this is what he was capable of past his physical prime. Statistically, he’s not far behind [an arguably peak] Walt Frazier, who we voted in at #32.
Anyway, I wanted to throw a little spotlight on what he was capable of in the NBA post-surgery because I want everyone cognizant of the very real possibility (if not the likelihood) that he was even better before his knee injury. If you don’t think the knee injury affected him, consider his scoring averages (it’s all that’s available on game log data of the time) in ‘69 before the injury: he was averaging 33.4 ppg pre-injury. In the 11 rs games AFTER coming back from injury: 19.9 ppg, followed by a significantly sub-standard (poor, actually) playoffs. I realize I cannot precisely extrapolate what he was in ‘70 by citing his late-season (post-injury) stats from ‘69; but anyway take it for what it’s worth.
In the ‘69 ABA season (marginally stronger than the ‘68 ABA, imo) there was also a presumably near-peak Rick Barry around for 35 games to compare to….. ‘69 Barry per 100 poss estimates: 36.0 pts, 9.95 reb, 4.1 ast @ +11.35% rTS PER 29.6, .301 WS/48 in 38.9 mpg
**‘69 Hawkins per 100 poss estimates: 33.6 pts, 12.6 reb, 4.35 ast @ +8.25% rTS. PER 29.7, .293 WS/48 in 39.4 mpg. **this includes the aforementioned 11 games (11 of 47 total) AFTER coming back from the injury, btw. Given the scoring drop I already outlined, it’s safe to assume his overall pre-injury numbers were a little better than what a near-peak Barry was doing in the same league. Frankly, he was probably a better player (before the injury) in '69 than he was in '68.
Now on to his ‘68 peak season (perhaps only peak by default, because he was actually healthy from start to finish)…... Yes, the ABA of the late 60’s was not overly loaded with talent, as Clyde Frazier pointed out. It wasn’t total bush-league, either. Mel Daniels was there, and there were several other legitimately “good” (if not truly “All-Star level”) players around: Donnie Freeman, Louie Dampier, Larry Jones, Roger Brown, Doug Moe, John Beasley, etc. And at any rate, Hawkins didn’t just distinguish himself in this crowd…….he utterly crushed them. He led the league handily in PER and WS/48, for instance, despite playing a league-leading 44.9 mpg. He had nearly twice as many OWS as the 2nd-place guy. He dominated that league to a degree that we haven’t often seen. Seriously: do a search for seasons with >28 PER (his was 28.8), >.270 WS/48 (his was .273), and >40 mpg (his was a whopping 44.9) in NBA and ABA history…...you come up with just 10 NBA seasons (3 of Kareem, 3 of Wilt, 2 of Jordan, 1 of Robinson, 1 of Shaq), and only 1 in ABA history (Connie Hawkins). If we change the requirement to 42 mpg, five of those NBA seasons disappear, btw.
Per 100 possession estimates for ‘68: 26.6 pts, 13.4 reb, 4.55 ast, just 2.8 tov @ +11.45% rTS. His 59.7% TS would be elite even by today’s standards.
And then he got even better in the playoffs.PER 30.0 and .310 WS/48 in 44.0 mpg in the playoffs, as he led the Pipers to the title. His numbers in the playoffs are gross even with considerations of pace: 29.9 ppg, 12.3 rpg, 4.6 apg, 3.4 topg @ 65.1% TS (which is like +16.8 rTS!!).
So yeah: regardless of the strength of the ABA in ‘68, I look at all of the above and absolutely I believe he’s a valid candidate at this stage.
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd "Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
1st ballot - Elgin Baylor 1961 2nd ballot - Bob Petit 1963 3rd ballot - Willis Reed 1969/1970
I think I slightly overrated McAdoo in the past. Also, I don't want to lose next votes, nobody take him for next threads...
Anyway, Baylor is still my top peak. There are some good posts in earlier threads about him, so I don't need to explain my choice.
After him, I have Bob Petit - the most underrated player ever. I don't know why there is such a big gap between him and Karl Malone in terms of peaks. He's great RS player and EVEN BETTER playoff performer. Willis is my close 3rd. Amazing two way player, anchored the best defense in the league iin 1969. Very good, tough defender and amazing skillset on offense. Better offensive player than Dwight in my opinion (though worse rebounder and defender). Could do it all - shoot midrange, play in the post, set screens. Also great leader and respected amongs other players.
He exceeded his already stellar regular season production in the playoffs across the board, and this was while playing through injuries as I’ll detail below. It was one of the most impressive post season performances in the modern era.
At his peak, king was one of the most dynamic scorers the league had seen. He was more methodical than flashy, but he knew what he was good at and kept going to it. His turnaround jumper was so lethal that he didn't even have to look at the hoop when releasing the shot. It was all in 1 quick motion where the defender really had no chance to block it. He was also very bull-like in the open court. Not a high leaper, but extremely powerful with long strides getting to the rim.
He was probably best known for his 1st round game 5 clincher against the pistons in 84:
In a critical and decisive Game 5, Bernard King was his usual unstoppable self putting up 40 points as the Knicks held a double-digit lead with under two minutes remaining in the fourth quarter. Then Thomas decided to take things into his own hands by putting on a performance of epic proportions, tallying 16 points within the game’s final 94 seconds, to force overtime.
King and Thomas exchanged offensive blows like a heavyweight title fight, with King getting the final blow by jamming an offensive put-back in the games final moments, giving him a game high 46 points and the Knicks a 3-2 series win. King showed a national audience that he would become one of the game’s most prolific scoring machines before injuries robbed him of his explosiveness. Game 5 was also arguably the moment that put a young “Zeke” on par with the NBA’s elite.
The Knicks would go on to lose to the eventual NBA champion celtics in 7 games, as he played through injuries and still averaged 29.1 PPG on 59.7% TS in the series. The guy was just relentless. The celtics also ranked 1st in SRS and 3rd in defense that season.
"The key was his preparation," said former Knicks coach and ESPN analyst Hubie Brown.
Part of that preparation included practicing thousands of shots from what King called his "sweet spots." In the half court, he identified three points along the baseline out to the sideline, then extended an imaginary line from a halfway point up the lane to the sideline with three more, then three more extended from the foul line to the sideline. He did the same on the other side of the lane.
Within the lane he identified four spots from the rim to the top of the key. These 22 spots, all within 18 feet of the basket, created a matrix of areas from which he felt supremely confident he could score. If a team tried to deny him the ball on offense, he would move from one sweet spot to another.
"He had the ability to see what all five positions were doing. That's how he could handle double- and triple-teams, because he knew where everyone would be," Brown said. "He knew how to create space for the high-percentage shot or find the guy who was open."
1. Rick Barry 1975 - Led the team to the title and league in scoring 2. Nique 1986 - Finished second to peak Bird in MVP voting, led in scoring was the #2 seed and finished ahead of Hakeem, Magic and Kareem in MVP voting 3. Penny 1996 - #3 in MVP voting, the best player on the Magic even over Shaq and led them to 60 wins.
"Talent wins games, but teamwork and intelligence wins championships." - Michael Jordan
Penny was a monster in 96. Rating out even better than Shaq by most metrics I care about. So versatile, incredible playmaker and scorer. Very high resiliency because of his skillset.
Confident about the Penny pick, after it it's a mess. Open to be convinced of some guys here.
PG coming up soon on my list: Baron, Westbrook, Stockton, Price, Kidd
Wings coming up soon on my list: Hill, Carter, Gervin , Roy
Big men coming up soon on my list: Rasheed, Griffin
Due to time I cannot participate regularly, sorry for that.
What I don't think should be happening and what is happening, that there are plenty of posters that committed to the project from the very start (I didn't join until I wanted to get more discussion going) and really engage in a lot of other topics but don't drop their vote here. Weak sauce on their part and everyone knows which posters I am talking about without dropping names.
Penny was a monster in 96. Rating out even better than Shaq by most metrics I care about. So versatile, incredible playmaker and scorer. Very high resiliency because of his skillset.
Confident about the Penny pick, after it it's a mess. Open to be convinced of some guys here.
PG coming up soon on my list: Baron, Westbrook, Stockton, Price, Kidd
Wings coming up soon on my list: Hill, Carter, Gervin , Roy
Big men coming up soon on my list: Rasheed, Griffin
Due to time I cannot participate regularly, sorry for that.
What I don't think should be happening and what is happening, that there are plenty of posters that committed to the project from the very start (I didn't join until I wanted to get more discussion going) and really engage in a lot of other topics but don't drop their vote here. Weak sauce on their part and everyone knows which posters I am talking about without dropping names.
I can't remember if you'd previously said you're not backing anyone pre-merger (Baylor? McAdoo? Barry? Reed?...NONE of these guys even "coming up soon" for you?). I won't even ask about Hawkins or Pettit, as I can likely guess your reluctance with them.
Or even post-merger: McHale? Elton Brand? Gary Payton? None of these guys even coming up soon?
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd "Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
Penny was a monster in 96. Rating out even better than Shaq by most metrics I care about. So versatile, incredible playmaker and scorer. Very high resiliency because of his skillset.
Confident about the Penny pick, after it it's a mess. Open to be convinced of some guys here.
PG coming up soon on my list: Baron, Westbrook, Stockton, Price, Kidd
Wings coming up soon on my list: Hill, Carter, Gervin , Roy
Big men coming up soon on my list: Rasheed, Griffin
Due to time I cannot participate regularly, sorry for that.
What I don't think should be happening and what is happening, that there are plenty of posters that committed to the project from the very start (I didn't join until I wanted to get more discussion going) and really engage in a lot of other topics but don't drop their vote here. Weak sauce on their part and everyone knows which posters I am talking about without dropping names.
I can't remember if you'd previously said you're not backing anyone pre-merger (Baylor? McAdoo? Barry? Reed?...NONE of these guys even "coming up soon" for you?). I won't even ask about Hawkins or Pettit, as I can likely guess your reluctance with them.
Or even post-merger: McHale? Elton Brand? Gary Payton? None of these guys even coming up soon?
Yup I won't back anyone of these guys. My knowledge of them is way too limited. There isn't enough footage to evaluate properly and in context. Anecdotal quotes and some statistics aren't something I wanna hang my hat on.
Payton? One of the guys that is on the Kidd tier, but there are several other good PG's having an argument against him.
McHale? Good one, not gonna back him though, because I am really unsure how his offensive and defensive impact might have looked. Could be above the two big guys I mentioned, but really not sure about McHale.
Brand? Very good player, but Rasheed or Griffin are guys that I would comfortably put ahead of him.
Your thoughts about Drexler vs Pippen vs Penny, guys? I have them all very close, would probably go with Penny, Clyde, Scottie, in this order, but it's awfully close. Especially Drexler vs Hardaway is pretty much a toss-up, to me.
Also, McHale vs Brand is extremely close, to me. McHale was a more efficient scorer, but Brand was very efficient, as well, on very similar volume, very comparable defensively (for what it's worth, Brand was much stronger, physically, which helps in terms of 1 on 1 post D), Brand seemed to be a bit better on the boards, and perhaps also the better passer. Advanced metrics favor Brand, too. So, contrary to popular belief, I would side with Brand. He had a really strong playoff showing. Destroyed the Suns and kept his team competitive right to the end (Clippers lost game 7 by 20 points, but Brand still had a good game, 36 points on 16/26 from the field, 9 rebounds, and only 1 turnover, so he doesn't really deserve any blame for that loss). Brand was IMO dangerously close to LeBron and Kobe in '06. Very similar team success, advanced metrics, all of them led mediocre teams (Brand and Kobe performed on a very similar level against the Suns in two consecutive rounds - maybe even Brand was a bit better - sure, the Suns had no inside presence, but EB really took advantage of that - averaged 31/10/4/1/3 on almost 63% TS - that's a really dominant performance - especially game 1 was incredible - 40 points on 18/22 from the field - just think about it - how amazing it is to score 40 points on 82% FG in the playoffs?)
Unlike Rebel, I wouldn't even put Rasheed in Brand's category. Wallace never really carried a team the way Brand did in '06. Griffin is much closer (and so are Amare and Pau), but I'd still lean towards Brand. I'd take Brand's superior defense over Griffin's playmaking.
Quotatious wrote:Your thoughts about Drexler vs Pippen vs Penny, guys? I have them all very close, would probably go with Penny, Clyde, Scottie, in this order, but it's awfully close. Especially Drexler vs Hardaway is pretty much a toss-up, to me.
Also, McHale vs Brand is extremely close, to me. McHale was a more efficient scorer, but Brand was very efficient, as well, on very similar volume, very comparable defensively (for what it's worth, Brand was much stronger, physically, which helps in terms of 1 on 1 post D), Brand seemed to be a bit better on the boards, and perhaps also the better passer. Advanced metrics favor Brand, too. So, contrary to popular belief, I would side with Brand. He had a really strong playoff showing. Destroyed the Suns and kept his team competitive right to the end (Clippers lost game 7 by 20 points, but Brand still had a good game, 36 points on 16/26 from the field, 9 rebounds, and only 1 turnover, so he doesn't really deserve any blame for that loss). Brand was IMO dangerously close to LeBron and Kobe in '06. Very similar team success, advanced metrics, all of them led mediocre teams (Brand and Kobe performed on a very similar level against the Suns in two consecutive rounds - maybe even Brand was a bit better - sure, the Suns had no inside presence, but EB really took advantage of that - averaged 31/10/4/1/3 on almost 63% TS - that's a really dominant performance - especially game 1 was incredible - 40 points on 18/22 from the field - just think about it - how amazing it is to score 40 points on 82% FG in the playoffs?)
Unlike Rebel, I wouldn't even put Rasheed in Brand's category. Wallace never really carried a team the way Brand did in '06. Griffin is much closer (and so are Amare and Pau), but I'd still lean towards Brand. I'd take Brand's superior defense over Griffin's playmaking.
Brand's 06 campaign is just highly regarded because he stuffed the stat sheet and did it pretty efficiently. His impact however does not match that boxscore production.
His high usage made him a worse defender, so that I can only see him as a slight positive on that end. Offensively he would have to be amazing, which he wasn't to offset his defense from the 4 spot. His reputation does not apply to his capabilities that year, because the load on offense was too big.
Now think about it, would you advocate for him if you would only talk offense. Probably not, since Brand was nothing special in the playmaking department and "merely a good scorer"
NPI RAPM by JE
Brand 06 , 34 th in the league
+2.0 (+1.7/+0.3)
Rasheed was an actual two way player at his peak and Griffin is a better offensive player which gives him the nod.
Sure Drexler was a bit better offensively, but if you think of Pippen as one of the premier perimeter defenders of All-Time there is no way that he shouldn't be considered better than Drexler, who himself was an average to above average defender.
RebelWithACause wrote:Brand's 06 campaign is just highly regarded because he stuffed the stat sheet and did it pretty efficiently. His impact however does not match that boxscore production.
His high usage made him a worse defender, so that I can only see him as a slight positive on that end. Offensively he would have to be amazing, which he wasn't to offset his defense from the 4 spot. His reputation does not apply to his capabilities that year, because the load on offense was too big.
Now think about it, would you advocate for him if you would only talk offense. Probably not, since Brand was nothing special in the playmaking department and "merely a good scorer"
NPI RAPM by JE
Brand 06 , 34 th in the league
+2.0 (+1.7/+0.3)
Rasheed was an actual two way player at his peak and Griffin is a better offensive player which gives him the nod.
Here's where I have a problem with plus minus type stats. Watching Brand play, I felt like he didn't have any weaknesses, i.e. you couldn't really game-plan against him in a way that would make him ineffective. He could score inside and out, very good FT shooter, could go the line fairly well, decent passer (nothing special in this regard, but certainly not below average), pretty good athlete - very wide body, excellent strength, but also soft shooting touch, as I've just mentioned. Well, his mid-range jumper was absolutely money - over 47% from between 10 feet out to the 3-pt line, on more than 9 attempts per game. Looking at his boxscore stats combined with eye-test, skill-set analysis, his team's roster and results, I can't see how Brand wasn't an elite impact guy that year. I know he's nothing special based on RAPM or on/off court net rating, but those results just don't go together with any other way of player evaluation, in this case.
Is Griffin better offensively? Quite possibly, but it needs to be noted that Blake plays on a clearly better team. Even just having prime CP3 over 36/37 year old Cassell is a huge improvement. Cassell was pretty good in '06, but really not close to the '04 version that KG played with. Mobley and Crawford is pretty much a wash. Both had skills, but they were kinda meh impact-wise. Kaman was young and pretty much an average starting center. I'd take DeAndre over '06 Kaman. Maggette played only 32 games in RS, and even though he was really efficient in the playoffs, he's also known as a guy who gets vastly overrated by boxscore, and doesn't play much defense. That's really not a better supporting cast than Griffin had between '12 and '15.
Sheed might be better defensively, and he can shoot the 3, which Brand couldn't do, but I've never seen Sheed dominate offensively like Brand could. Based on eye-test, '06 Brand was a much better franchise player than Sheed, to me. Sheed was very inconsistent and much better in a complementary role, or as a part of an ensemble cast type team, like the 2000 Blazers or 2004 Pistons, while Brand could be a traditional star go-to big. I'd probably take peak Webber over Rasheed, too (and generally, I'm really low on Webber, so that's saying a lot). Nothing against Sheed, but to me, he was just like a better version of 2015 Draymond Green, which is great, and a high impact player, but not a real go-to offensive star.
RebelWithACause wrote:Oh and Drexler should be nowhere close to Pippen.
Sure Drexler was a bit better offensively, but if you think of Pippen as one of the premier perimeter defenders of All-Time there is no way that he shouldn't be considered better than Drexler, who himself was an average to above average defender.
Nowhere close? I can't see how that would be the case, at all. IMO Drexler's offensive edge is at least as big (or, at least as important - "important" would be a better word to use here than "big") as Pippen's defensive edge. Drexler led the Blazers to 57 wins and pretty much sustained his RS level of play in the postseason. Even his finals performance wasn't bad at all. He held his own against Jordan and Pippen. He was roughly on the level of '08 and '10 Kobe against Boston, as far as finals (I'd say a bit better than '08 finals Kobe, and a bit worse than '10 finals Kobe). It's just insanely difficult to play against near-peak Jordan and Pippen, two of the best wing defenders ever, in their athletic primes, as a wing player on the opposing team. Not to mention the Bulls had excellent team defense, 4th best defense in the league that year.
Drexler was easily a more potent offensive weapon than Pippen, significantly better scorer, and I don't see how it's debatable. Also, I'd take great offense over great defense from a wing, so I'm going with Drexler.
It's just hard to measure defense, and how much it matters versus offense, but based on eye-test, I felt like Drexler was much more dangerous offensively, and his team's results are great, not just in '92, but he was also the best player on the '90 (59 wins, finals appearance, and Drexler had a great series against an elite defensive team with great wing defenders like Rodman and Dumars, in the finals) and '91 Blazers (63 wins, best record in the league, and WCF appearance).
Drexler could also fill the statsheet very well in '88 and '89, as well as sacrifice some of his production and lead very strong regular season AND playoff teams, in the early 90s. Glide was certainly a good defender, too (very good, borderline elite help defender, and about average man defender).
I just don't understand how you can say he's not close to Pippen. By the way, here's my recent peak Drexler vs Pippen thread.
viewtopic.php?t=1411061
Drexler won the poll 17-5, so it was a blowout (personally, I think it should be much closer, close to a tie, but I'd still give Drexler the edge).
To start off, let’s just look at some base stats….. ‘68 Hawkins rs per 100 poss: 26.6 pts, 13.4 reb, 4.55 ast @ 59.7% TS (+11.45% rTS) 28.8 PER, .273 WS/48 in 44.9 mpg ‘75 McAdoo rs per 100 poss: 35.6 pts, 14.5 reb, 2.3 ast @ 56.9% TS (+6.68% rTS) 25.8 PER, .242 WS/48 in 43.2 mpg ‘87 McHale rs per 100 poss: 31.9 pts, 12.1 reb, 3.1 ast @ 65.5% TS (+11.73% rTS!!) 24.0 PER, .232 WS/48 in 39.7 mpg
Hawkins then got even better in the playoffs; McAdoo took a small dip in the playoffs, McHale (injured) took a more substantial dip in the post-season (though at 17.9 PER, .120 WS/48, and +2.0 BPM, he’s still pretty good). So taken at face-value, statistically Hawkins looks the best, McAdoo probably 2nd, McHale third. However, obviously we can’t merely take them at face-value; strength of competition must be factored in (especially considering that PER and WS/48 are standardized relative to the the league average player).
Without a doubt (imo), Hawkins played in the weakest league of the three, where there was precious few in the way of actual elite star level players for him to compete with.
The NBA of ‘75 was better, but still a bit “depleted” of talent relative to some other eras. Guys like West, Robertson, Chamberlain, Reed, as well as guys like DeBusschere, Gus Johnson, Jerry Lucas have all vanished. And the ABA has robbed them of much of the top-tier replacement talent: near-peak Dr. J, peak Gilmore and George McGinnis, as well as prime Dan Issel, Bobby Jones, George Gervin, Maurice Lucas, etc are all still in the ABA at this point. In ‘75, guys like Jim Price, Steve Mix, Charlie Scott, and aging and fading versions of Dave Bing and Gail Goodrich were all-stars. In ‘87, otoh, McHale is distinguishing himself in a league that has peak or near-peak versions of Magic, Larry, Worthy, Dominique, as well as prime versions of Jordan, Olajuwon, Moses, Barkley, Isiah, Parish, English, as well as several (maybe dozens??) of guys at a level similar to prime Mo Cheeks, Tom Chambers, Fat Lever, Mark Aguirre, and Bill Laimbeer.
Comparing Player Attributes…. I’m going to start with Hawkins (my 3rd ballot) and McAdoo (my top HM).
Scoring Some may be inclined to wave Hawkins aside as a scorer due to the competition in the early ABA. But even against weaker competition, Hawkins’ volume and efficiency (shown above; and he was going for even larger volume at 65.1% TS in the playoffs, too) is nothing to sneeze at. Combined with that: 1) we see in his pre-injury numbers in ‘69 that he was averaging approximately 36-37 pts/100 poss at probably 59-60% TS (~+9% or so rTS).....pre-injury (and presumably near-peak) Rick Barry was averaging around 37 pts/100 poss at ~62% TS in the same league. 2) Post-injury/surgery Hawkins in ‘70 (an NBA that was marginally better than that of ‘75, imho) was averaging 24.8 pts/100 poss at +5.16% rTS. If I assume pre-injury Hawkins was better (and his drop-off in late ‘69 is dramatic enough to suggest he likely suffered some permanent deficits)..... …...there’s plenty of room to credit Hawkins as a formidable scorer. There’s sufficient video evidence to see that he was a very good close-to-mid range (like 10-18 ft) shooter, excellent transition finisher, capable of amazing close-range one-handed shots (in the same vein as Gervin or Dr. J), and a good FT-shooter.
Ultimately, though, I have to give at least a tiny edge to McAdoo. Pretty massive volume scoring on very very good efficiency in a stronger league than Hawkins. Looking at how many mid-range (or short-to-mid range, like 10-16 ft) jumpers he took---often contested and off the dribble---that he was still able to shoot >51% FG% is remarkable. And being able to shoot so effectively off the dribble (and from decent range) when you’re 6’9” is an impressive and scary skillset. 80+% FT-shooter that year, too. And given guys like Chris Bosh, Kevin Love, Jack Sikma, and apparently now DeMarcus Cousins all learned to extend their range out to the 3pt line, I’ve no reason to believe that McAdoo couldn’t also. As result, I think he’d fit well into this era of floor-spacing bigs, pick-n’-pops, etc.
Passing/Playmaking/Handles Even relative to positional expectations, this one obviously goes to Hawkins. Can delve into this further if someone disagrees; but the wealth of evidence (ast and TO rates, limited video of Hawkins, reputation, etc) all point to Hawkins. Granted he’s slipping out of his prime by the time turnovers were recorded, but McAdoo actually appears a touch turnover-prone (whereas Hawkins appeared the opposite, in the early ABA at least).
Defense I’m not exactly sure what to think of Hawkins’ defense. There’s so little video available to the public of his peak, no defensive stats at all (late career stl/blk numbers look OK, fwiw), and limited anecdotal info available. The ONLY subjective thing I’ve heard of his defense was a rating as “bad” from a poster here whose credibility I question. Otherwise, I’ve heard nothing (good or bad). Overall, I guess I’d grade his defense as average to maybe slightly below (but with a big “*” by it, due to lack of info).
This would be fairly consistent with McAdoo’s defensive reputation, too, as his is pretty mediocre (to sub-par) as well. Although in McAdoo’s defense, part of that is likely in relation to the fact that he was forced to play most of his career at a position he was significantly under-sized for. otoh, mediocre defense is more difficult to “hide” when you’re a big man; so perhaps it’s less “forgivable” for McAdoo???
Overall, I’m going to call defense roughly a wash. I certainly don’t think it’s any sort of big divider between them.
Rebounding I’m calling this roughly a wash, too. McAdoo averaged 14.5 reb/100 poss vs. 13.4 reb/100 poss for Hawkins (pre-injury Hawkins averaged nearly the same in ‘69, too, fwiw). With positional expectations in mind---given McAdoo was 6’9” and playing C, while Hawkins was 6’8” and playing primarily on the perimeter (SF)---I’d give the edge to Hawkins if all other things were equal. But again: weak early ABA. Brings it back to a wash for me.
Playoff Considerations fwiw, McAdoo dropped off mildly in the playoffs, whereas Hawkins actually elevated his level of play even further in the playoffs.
Overall, this comparison is basically a wash to me. I’ve let Hawkins nudge him out for my ballot, perhaps based on the elevated playoff play, but I reserve the right to switch to McAdoo. I’ve flip-flopped more than once on this comparison.
How does McHale compare in these aspects of the game? Here’s how I see it….
I think he’s [clearly] the best scorer of the three. Seriously: 31.9 pts/100 poss @ 65.5% TS (+11.73% rTS) in a what is [perhaps by far] the most competitive league of the three is ridiculous. Critics may mention how the presence of Bird and Parish takes pressure off of McHale. Fair enough, but they also steal primacy (volume) from him. Look how a near-peak Chris Bosh’s volume fell when he arrived in Miami next to two stars. That McHale was a dominant enough scorer to warrant the volume he had among that company is remarkable. Critics may also cite Larry Bird’s playmaking as responsible for a big chunk of McHale’s efficiency. This is a touch misleading, imo; watching games from that era, McHale appears to be getting A LOT of his points on simple low-post isolations: he posts up, they dump him the ball, and he destroys whoever is guarding him. Simple as that. I’d further cite McHale’s ‘89 numbers as evidence of his prowess. Bird missed basically this entire season, and McHale is 31 years old and decidedly past his peak at this point (was really never quite the same after the injury late in ‘87), too: he still averaged 29.9 pts/100 poss @ 60.8% TS (+7.11% rTS).
McHale’s clearly [imo] the best defender of the three, too. Guy who can guard outside his position (had to often guard SF so Bird could guard a big), contests well, fundamentally sound post defender, and the team’s leading rim-protector (2.7 blk/100 poss in ‘87); All-Def 1st Team, too.
As a passer/playmaker, I’d rate him behind Hawkins, but likely at least marginally ahead of McAdoo from all I’ve seen. Takes care of the ball very well.
Rebounding: one of the weaker aspects of his game, likely last of the three, though likely just a little behind the other two. Again, I’ll point out that he had to often guard perimeter players (SF’s), which pulls him away from the rim and reduces his likelihood of getting on the defensive glass. Still averaged 12.1 reb/100 poss that year.
Based on all of the above, I’d rate ‘87 McHale significantly above both Hawkins and McAdoo…...in the regular season. But then there are playoff considerations: McHale was injured, and though still a significantly above average player despite a broken foot, he does suffer the largest post-season drop-off of the three. That’s the only consideration that keeps this relatively close for me. I’m still inclined to give him the edge because he was flat-out a better player for 90% of the season.
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd "Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
RebelWithACause wrote: Yup I won't back anyone of these guys. My knowledge of them is way too limited. There isn't enough footage to evaluate properly and in context. Anecdotal quotes and some statistics aren't something I wanna hang my hat on.
Hawkins is, I admit, a bit mysterious due to the concerns you cite. Perhaps Pettit as well. Most of the others, though, I think there's sufficient video and information available to formulate reasonable opinions.
I get your reluctance, but it still troubles me (just a little) as it sets those guys at an unfair disadvantage in the balloting.
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd "Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
Quotatious wrote:Your thoughts about Drexler vs Pippen vs Penny, guys? I have them all very close, would probably go with Penny, Clyde, Scottie, in this order, but it's awfully close. Especially Drexler vs Hardaway is pretty much a toss-up, to me.
All pretty close for me, too. I'd spoken up in your thread about Pippen/Drexler. I don't think the offensive gap is too large (I cited copious data and reasoning for that in your thread). The defensive gap is "bigger" than the offensive gap, though there is the consideration you mentioned: does that necessarily mean "more important" when we're talking about perimeter players? idk. In a vacuum, I'd decided yes, and gave the marginal edge to Pippen. But it is just that: marginal.
Penny is right there with Pippen for me. I'd probably rate it: Penny/Pippen (maybe Penny just marginally ahead???) Drexler
But it's close...
Quotatious wrote:Also, McHale vs Brand is extremely close, to me. McHale was a more efficient scorer, but Brand was very efficient, as well, on very similar volume,
Yeah, but while Brand's efficiency is "very good", McHale's was on a "omg what is happening??!" level for a high-volume scorer. You seem to have implied that it's kinda close, but it's really just not.
Quotatious wrote:very comparable defensively (for what it's worth, Brand was much stronger, physically, which helps in terms of 1 on 1 post D),
Yeah, but he's also a bit shorter, which hurts in terms of 1 on 1 post D.
While I'll allow Brand was probably underrated as a defender, I don't know if I'd go as far as calling him comparable to McHale defensively. Probably close, but idk. His blk numbers are a little better, but I don't think he has any edge as a post defender (honestly, based on my eye-test I'm not sure if he's AS GOOD), he's less versatile/a lesser defender if caught on a switch, general attention to D maybe leaves a little to be desired relative to McHale imo. Brand was a small positive defensively by both NPI and PI DRAPM, fwiw......just not sure I'd imply he's as good as McHale in this regard.
Quotatious wrote: Brand seemed to be a bit better on the boards, and perhaps also the better passer.
More or less agree with that, although I think it's super-marginal on the boards. Again, I think McHale's aforementioned application on defense (pulling him away from the rim) reduced his rebounding numbers a pinch; and he still avg 12.1 reb/100 poss and 14.0% TRB%, vs. 13.3 and 14.8% for Brand. Given application consideration, this is perhaps a near-negligible difference.
I suppose, though not by much of a substantial margin (in the rs, at least)..... '06 Brand: 26.5 PER, .229 WS/48, +6.3 BPM, 116 ORtg/100 DRtg (+16) in 39.2 mpg '87 McHale: 24.0 PER, .232 WS/48, +5.2 BPM, 125 ORtg/106 DRtg (+19) in 39.7 mpg
Quotatious wrote:Unlike Rebel, I wouldn't even put Rasheed in Brand's category. Wallace never really carried a team the way Brand did in '06. Griffin is much closer (and so are Amare and Pau), but I'd still lean towards Brand.
I agree. Though conventional data really undersells Sheed; his peak is much higher than his box/advanced metrics suggest, imo.
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd "Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
My nominations will be: 1. 96 Penny Hardaway 2. 61 Elgin Baylor 3. 99 Jason Kidd
I've already explained all 3 in previous threads but my main argument for each comes out to be: Penny - offensively he's more capable of leading a great team than probably anyone left and defensively he's above average.
Elgin - High level scoring on above average efficiency, high volume passing, and GOAT rebounding for a SF all in one package. The next season in 62 he's worse statistically as a whole but he missed a lot of games so his impact is easier to spot and his team has a +4.6 SRS when he plays and a -2.2 SRS without him when adjusting for injuries.
Kidd - One of the highest single season on/off scores ever. It is also the best offensive team he's been on. Now 03 has the advantage of a superior postseason but I don't think he was a better player then just that he was in a weaker conference.
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd "Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
Quotatious wrote:Also, McHale vs Brand is extremely close, to me. McHale was a more efficient scorer, but Brand was very efficient, as well, on very similar volume,
Yeah, but while Brand's efficiency is "very good", McHale's was on a "omg what is happening??!" level for a high-volume scorer. You seem to have implied that it's kinda close, but it's really just not.
But how much of McHale's efficiency is a result of him being this good, versus playing with a GOAT-level passer in Bird? Because if we are just looking at boxscore production, someone like Amar'e ranks well up there:
It's pretty much common consensus that Amare's goodness on offense is well overrated compared to his production, isn't it logical that the same would apply to McHale?
theonlyclutch's AT FGA-limited team - The Malevolent Eight
PG: 2008 Chauncey Billups/ 2013 Kyle Lowry SG: 2005 Manu Ginobili/2012 James Harden SF: 1982 Julius Erving PF: 2013 Matt Bonner/ 2010 Amir Johnson C: 1977 Kareem Abdul Jabaar
theonlyclutch wrote:But how much of McHale's efficiency is a result of him being this good, versus playing with a GOAT-level passer in Bird? Because if we are just looking at boxscore production, someone like Amar'e ranks well up there:
It's pretty much common consensus that Amare's goodness on offense is well overrated compared to his production, isn't it logical that the same would apply to McHale?
I don't think playing with Bird had a lot of impact on McHale's numbers. When you look at the 1988-89 season, when Bird played only 6 games, McHale still averaged 22.5 ppg on 60.8% TS. That's a decline efficiency-wise compared to 1987-88, but then, when Bird came back in '90 (Larry played 75 games, and was still a top tier superstar), McHale averaged 20.9 ppg on 62.3% TS, so basically the same scoring as he did in '89 (slightly lower average, slightly higher efficency). It's seems like '87 and '88 were simply McHale's best seasons, the only two seasons of his career when he shot that otherworldly 60.4% FG and 65-66% TS).
By the way - as far as the '89 Celtics - I'm wondering if Robert Parish wasn't really the one who sacrificed the most on that Celtics team. I think he was clearly the best player on that team, ahead of McHale - all of the boxscore metrics favor Parish that year. It was an amazing season by Chief, considering he was already 35/36 year old, and all of a sudden had possibly the best season of his career (or at least top 3 or 5).
One thing about McHale - I don't think he could be a high-20s scorer while also being able to maintain his insane efficiency, if he played on a team without other Hall of Famers like Bird, Parish and DJ (and another very good player like Ainge). That 1986-87 regular season seems like a bit of an outlier. 25-26 ppg was probably his ceiling in terms of volume, otherwise his efficiency would drop a bit (it'd still be at around 59-60% TS, but not quite 65-66%).
