Clyde Frazier wrote: Would prefer you not let it die on the table… give it another shot
As I said, it’s so tight at this point as far as i’m concerned, it’s hard to decide on anyone definitively with the 2nd and 3rd ballots. 92 drexler, for example, has barely been mentioned at all and has a great argument against penny who nearly was voted in last. Was busy this weekend and still comparing the 2 before putting in my ballot.
Just think there’s a lot of solid discussion left to be had. Hope it doesn’t end here.
I'm having a hard time justifying the time commitment to keep it going.
I've been trying to facilitate things for everyone as much as possible: a) when I post the new thread I include the list in the OP, so everyone know EXACTLY who's off the table AND what place they got (in case that's desired for comparisons to someone still on the table). b) I include links to all prior threads in case someone simply wants to cut and paste their ballots from the previous thread, or if they want to transplant a discussion from a prior thread, etc. c) Everyone gets quoted in the OP (including guys we haven't heard from in like 20 threads, just in case), so presumably everyone is getting a notification as soon as the new thread comes up. d) The 36-hour criteria is well known to all, so I'd assume that everyone can do the mental math to know when the proposed stop-time is (since they're getting notified when the thread goes up). But to make it even simpler (at least for all who reside somewhere in the Americas), I always directly state in the OP when the thread is to be shut down. e) Whenever I post a tally of the ballots up to a point, I AGAIN state when the thread is to be shut down, USUALLY again quoting everyone so they get a notification. f) I've probably posted more content in most of the individual threads past #30, and certainly if we looked at the last 15 threads collectively, I doubt anyone has posted more content (in effort to spark some more debate). g) I check back in to the PC forum often (seriously, really often) because I've been willing and wanting to babysit and nurture this project. But lately there's rarely anything new posted every time I check in. g) I even once stooped to guilt-tripping to get posters to come back.
......and yet here we hit the deadline with a mere four people (four!) casting ballots (only six showed up to say anything at all). I don't really want to put in the effort if others aren't going to put in any. I'd love to get out to #50, but I need to see some people (no offense, but more than just you and Quotatious) are going to come along with me.
I'm aware of and certainly appreciate all of the work you've put into this. Just asking that you try one more thread, saying it will be the last unless we get more participation. Let's see if we get a better turnout.
I'll give it a full two days, so stop-time for this one will be Wednesday night.
Dr Spaceman wrote:.
Mutnt wrote:.
RSCD_3 wrote:.
Quotatious wrote:.
Dr Positivity wrote:.
drza wrote:.
eminence wrote:.
yoyoboy wrote:.
RebelWithoutACause wrote:.
LA Bird wrote:.
MyUniBroDavis wrote:.
Gregoire wrote:.
PaulieWal wrote:.
The-Power wrote:.
SKF_85 wrote:.
Narigo wrote:.
Joao Saraiva wrote:.
PCProductions wrote:.
Moonbeam wrote:.
theonlyclutch wrote:.
BallerHogger wrote:.
michievous wrote:.
JordansBulls wrote:.
thizznation wrote:.
SideshowBob wrote:.
fpliii wrote:.
Owly wrote:.
70sFan wrote:.
"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: 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.
On the following line of thought: "McHale wasn't that great a scorer, he merely appears so as a result of Bird's playmaking".....
I'd already responded to this in the last thread with some observational stuff regarding McHale's isolation post game, as well as citing how in '89 (PAST his peak) when Bird missed basically the entire year, he still avg 29.9 pts/100 poss at 60.8% TS (comparable to peak Dwight, fwiw).
I'll augment my case by citing how he was with/without Bird in what I'm labeling his peak season ('87). Bird missed 8 games that season (McHale played in all 8 of those). Below are McHale's scoring numbers with and without Bird in '87:
69 games played with Bird: 25.9 ppg @ 65.5% TS, ~125.4 ORtg 8 games played without Bird: 28.0 ppg @ 65.6% TS, ~130.7 ORtg
I hope we can lay to rest this notion that Bird somehow "made" McHale as a scorer.
McHale (at his peak) is arguably the best pure scorer left on the table at this point, while simultaneously being an excellent defensive player. I'll be honest: how he doesn't have more traction at this point is baffling to me.
2nd 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.
3rd ballot: Bob McAdoo '75
Spoiler:
Hawkins vs. McAdoo (vs. McHale)
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, and his injury was a sort of fluky thing as opposed to chronic injury hitting a boiling point.
"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
I will again express my feelings of perplexity that Kevin McHale does not have more traction at this point. I've outlined this above, but again: he was averaging 31.9 pts/100 possessions @ 65.5% TS (+11.73% to league average ) that year, while playing next to another superstar level scorer (the attention that draws away from McHale may help his efficiency, but it was also draws away from his volume).
But at any rate, Bird's presence and/or playmaking did NOT make McHale as a scorer. As I'd noted above---->Bird missed 8 games that season (McHale played in all 8 of those). Below are McHale's scoring numbers with and without Bird in '87:
69 games played with Bird: 25.9 ppg @ 65.5% TS, ~125.4 ORtg 8 games played without Bird: 28.0 ppg @ 65.6% TS, ~130.7 ORtg
Another thing I'll note about McHale as a scorer: consistency. Wanna know how many times he failed to score at least 15 pts that regular season? Zero. Not a single game out of 77 where he didn't score at least 15. How many times did he fail to score at least 20? 8 times out of 77 games (and 2 of those 8 came in the the final six games after he got injured). He was so remarkably consistent.
Again: peak Kevin McHale might be the best pure scorer left on the table. I've been wracking my brain, and literally the ONLY guys still on the table I can think of whose peaks might conceivably be considered in the same league as peak McHale's as a scorer are Adrian Dantley, George Gervin, Bernard King, and maybe (????) Amar'e Stoudemire.
But the thing is: McHale is [quite clearly, and by a substantial margin vs some of them] a better defensive player than all of them. And not a single one of them is a better passer/playmaker (particularly relative to positional expectation) than him. McHale seems the least turnover prone among them too, fwiw.
And although rebounding is often considered one of the weakest aspects of McHale's game (generally), actually not a one of those four guys is a better rebounder than peak McHale. Even relative to positional norms, I don't think it can be said that any one of Gervin, Dantley, or King is definitively better than '87 McHale on the boards.
McHale in '87 was avg 12.1 reb/100 possessions with a TRB% of 14.0. This was as a PF, though bear in mind he was often drawn away from the rim on defense as he was frequently guarding the opposing SF so Bird could be "hidden" on the opposing PF. And he still managed to rebound at that rate (which is remarkably similar to what '15 Draymond Green was doing, for a recent comp).
Amar'e's peak would have to be either '05 or '08. His rebounding stats in those years: in '05 was 12.4 reb/100 with TRB% of 13.2. '08 was 13.3 reb/100 with TRB% of 15.2. This is while playing CENTER.
So I'm not sure that McHale (at his peak) isn't the best rebounder out of this group of guys too. So among these five guys he's arguably the best pure scorer, arguably the best rebounder, without a doubt the best defensive player, and definitely not last as a passer either. And just to re-iterate why I'm comparing him to these four players: because they're the only ones left who are even in the same neighborhood as a pure scorer.
The only thing potentially hurting McHale is his injury which carried into the playoffs. While I agree we cannot overlook this, I am certainly more understanding with regards to this one than with some others. This isn't like Wade and his knees just getting too sore and temperamental by the time post-season rolled around; this isn't like Manu and his myriad of chronic injuries becoming problematic; this isn't like Nash and his chronic back issues......McHale broke a bone in his ankle on a fluke play late in the rs: if this fluke play doesn't happen, presumably we'd have had the rs version of McHale straight thru the playoffs.
Don't be misled by his gangly stature.....at his best this was one of the greatest the game has seen. And he deserves to be in by now, 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
theonlyclutch wrote:Another plug for Kevin Love 2014 here:
Comparing Kevin Love that year with Moses Malone in 1982 (his peak statistical year, and similar-ish team circumstances) Per 100: KL - 35.4/(3.9 O) 17.0/6.0 (2.5 TOV), 59.1% TS, 120 ORTG, .245 WS/48, 7.2 OBPM, 26.9 PER MM - 36.6/(8.1 O) 17.3/2.1 (3.6 TOV), 57.6% TS, 118 ORTG, .218 WS/48, 5.4 OBPM, 26.8 PER
Looking at the stats, Kevin Love is taking slightly less volume at slightly better efficiency, a wayyy better passer (21.4% AST vs 6.9% AST), and also better at taking care of the ball (10.3% TOV vs 11.9% TOV), now Moses is much better on the O-boards, but one must take into account that K-Love has a .355 3PAr, with the requisite spacing effect, and the fact that era differences are less favorable to crashing O-boards today.
In terms of team circumstances, K-Love lead a better team (3.1 vs -0.39 SRS), both teams dropped off by ~11 SRS when they left w/ mitigating circumstances (MIN injuries, HOU tanking). While the version of Moses that was voted in @ #25 is not '82, if one thinks that Moses '82 would be a top 30-35 peak, then there's not much justification for leaving K-Love out, given how remarkably similar these seasons seem to be...
And yet Moses was a much better defender than Love. He wasn't necessarily a top tier defender or anything but a lot better than Love who was atrocious defensively in 2014.
Basketball is played on 2 ends of the floor, it's not all about offense.
I don't see how that's a good indictment on Love compared to HOU Moses, given that HOU was worse than MIN defensively over that timeframe....
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
trex_8063 wrote:I will again express my feelings of perplexity that Kevin McHale does not have more traction at this point. I've outlined this above, but again: he was averaging 31.9 pts/100 possessions @ 65.5% TS (+11.73% to league average ) that year, while playing next to another superstar level scorer (the attention that draws away from McHale may help his efficiency, but it was also draws away from his volume).
So I'm not sure that McHale (at his peak) isn't the best rebounder out of this group of guys too. So among these five guys he's arguably the best pure scorer, arguably the best rebounder, without a doubt the best defensive player, and definitely not last as a passer either. And just to re-iterate why I'm comparing him to these four players: because they're the only ones left who are even in the same neighborhood as a pure scorer.
Is he necessarily a better scorer than someone like Kevin Love though?
There's clearly a volume/efficiency tradeoff here, with Love's slightly better ability to avoid TOVs offseting a lower TS...I don't see much difference.
In other aspects: -Love is much better at rebounding, (17.0 vs 12.1, and when Love played closer to the basket, it was even more) McHale didn't increase TRBs when Bird was missing in '89, so it's not that.. -Love is a great passing big men while Mchale isn't (21.4% AST vs 9.8% AST) -Love has more range and can therefore stretch defenses better, making him deadly in a PnR situation in a way that McHale can't be.
These factors all point to Love exerting more non-boxscore offensive impact than McHale, meaning there's a good chance Love is a better offensive player than McHale overall, does the latter's advantage on D counteract this?
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
trex_8063 wrote:I will again express my feelings of perplexity that Kevin McHale does not have more traction at this point. I've outlined this above, but again: he was averaging 31.9 pts/100 possessions @ 65.5% TS (+11.73% to league average ) that year, while playing next to another superstar level scorer (the attention that draws away from McHale may help his efficiency, but it was also draws away from his volume).
So I'm not sure that McHale (at his peak) isn't the best rebounder out of this group of guys too. So among these five guys he's arguably the best pure scorer, arguably the best rebounder, without a doubt the best defensive player, and definitely not last as a passer either. And just to re-iterate why I'm comparing him to these four players: because they're the only ones left who are even in the same neighborhood as a pure scorer.
Is he necessarily a better scorer than someone like Kevin Love though?
There's clearly a volume/efficiency tradeoff here, with Love's slightly better ability to avoid TOVs offseting a lower TS...I don't see much difference.
In other aspects: -Love is much better at rebounding, (17.0 vs 12.1, and when Love played closer to the basket, it was even more) McHale didn't increase TRBs when Bird was missing in '89, so it's not that.. -Love is a great passing big men while Mchale isn't (21.4% AST vs 9.8% AST) -Love has more range and can therefore stretch defenses better, making him deadly in a PnR situation in a way that McHale can't be.
These factors all point to Love exerting more non-boxscore offensive impact than McHale, meaning there's a good chance Love is a better offensive player than McHale overall, does the latter's advantage on D counteract this?
See, a problem with Love is that, even though he is a phenomenal 3 point shooter, in terms of his actual shot, it doesent seem very good outside of 3 point territory.
I mean, in 2013-2014 he improved on this, and shot 40% from there. But he shot 34% from 10-16 feet, midrange.
I do believe that he deserves a mention. wasnt his rebound percentage 19%?
trex_8063 wrote:I will again express my feelings of perplexity that Kevin McHale does not have more traction at this point. I've outlined this above, but again: he was averaging 31.9 pts/100 possessions @ 65.5% TS (+11.73% to league average ) that year, while playing next to another superstar level scorer (the attention that draws away from McHale may help his efficiency, but it was also draws away from his volume).
So I'm not sure that McHale (at his peak) isn't the best rebounder out of this group of guys too. So among these five guys he's arguably the best pure scorer, arguably the best rebounder, without a doubt the best defensive player, and definitely not last as a passer either. And just to re-iterate why I'm comparing him to these four players: because they're the only ones left who are even in the same neighborhood as a pure scorer.
Is he necessarily a better scorer than someone like Kevin Love though?
There's clearly a volume/efficiency tradeoff here,
Added in the relative TS% to better illustrate how far from the mean both players are. I don't think the +3.5 pts/100 possession is a fair or even trade-off for ~6.5% better shooting efficiency. Seriously, that's like the difference between '15 Cousins and '11 Dirk Nowitzki. Also consider McHale did this while playing +3.4 mpg......so if pace were the same, Love would come out only like +0.2 ppg with those per 100 numbers.......meanwhile McHale's clearly a couple tiers ahead in efficiency (again, the difference between Cousins and peak Nowitzki).
theonlyclutch wrote:with Love's slightly better ability to avoid TOVs offseting a lower TS...I don't see much difference.
idk, "slightly" seems the operative word there. Love avg 3.5 tov/100 possessions with a TOV% of 10.3. McHale avg 3.1 tov/100 poss with a TOV% of 11.4. There's not a ton of difference there, not enough to totally off-set the difference in efficiency, imo. Even factoring in Love's passing:
theonlyclutch wrote:-Love is a great passing big men while Mchale isn't (21.4% AST vs 9.8% AST)
No argument here, he's def the better passer, and the best outlet passer of his generation imo. But even reviewing their respective ORtg's (which factors in pts, shooting efficiency, asts, and tovs): '14 Love: 120 ORtg (+13.3 to league avg, +11.1 to team avg) '87 McHale: 125 ORtg (+16.7 to league avg, +11.5 to team avg----a team that contained Bird, Parish, and Ainge)
I won't imply the margin is big; but I do believe McHale (at his peak) was a little better offensive hub than Love.
theonlyclutch wrote:In other aspects: -Love is much better at rebounding, (17.0 vs 12.1, and when Love played closer to the basket, it was even more) McHale didn't increase TRBs when Bird was missing in '89, so it's not that..
No argument here. Love's a significantly better rebounder.
theonlyclutch wrote:-Love has more range and can therefore stretch defenses better, making him deadly in a PnR situation in a way that McHale can't be.
This is conjecture, and it works both ways. I'll play the other side: I feel Love's superior range is largely a product of era, where such skills are STRONGLY encouraged and nurtured in big men (not the case in McHale's time). I feel McHale's capable of developing this skill had it been required of him; but teams barely shot threes in the 1980's (not even the guards), and were just barely getting on board with it in the early 90's. And note that in the last two years of his prime he hit 45 of 120 (37.5%) 3pt attempts (rs and playoffs combined). For comparison, Love's combined rs 3pt% over the last 5+ seasons is 36.7%. Now, that's on much higher volume, and with perception of Love as a 3pt threat and modern defenses' greater attention to rotating out on to shooters, he no doubt has been taking somewhat more contested treys.....but let's not pretend that bunches of these attempts are super-high degree of difficulty treys, off the dribble and such (92+% of his treys are assisted....so they're still basically spot-ups).
We have other indications of McHale's touch as a shooter, too fwiw (his FT-shooting, for instance: 83.4% over the final 7 years of his career, peaking at 89.3%).
theonlyclutch wrote:These factors all point to Love exerting more non-boxscore offensive impact than McHale, meaning there's a good chance Love is a better offensive player than McHale overall, does the latter's advantage on D counteract this?
Well again, we're seeing things differently here. I don't see that there's much to "counteract". You've implied Love is the better offensive player, but as I outlined above, I actually see the opposite as the case. And wrt non-boxscore offensive impact: despite having what would seem like some of the best box numbers, he was actually only 19th in the league in PI ORAPM (value was less than half that of Lebron or Harden that year; barely more than half that of Chris Paul, too).
Again, not a big edge, but I do view peak McHale as the marginally better offensive player. Love is the significantly better rebounder. McHale is the better defender. HOW MUCH better? idk; I do think '14 Love is getting underrated defensively, fwiw. I think by '14 he'd made some adjustments which vastly improved his defensive value over his early years. But still not close to McHale in this regard (he's just well ahead of guys like Amar'e or Boozer).
"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
trex_8063 wrote:I will again express my feelings of perplexity that Kevin McHale does not have more traction at this point. I've outlined this above, but again: he was averaging 31.9 pts/100 possessions @ 65.5% TS (+11.73% to league average ) that year, while playing next to another superstar level scorer (the attention that draws away from McHale may help his efficiency, but it was also draws away from his volume).
So I'm not sure that McHale (at his peak) isn't the best rebounder out of this group of guys too. So among these five guys he's arguably the best pure scorer, arguably the best rebounder, without a doubt the best defensive player, and definitely not last as a passer either. And just to re-iterate why I'm comparing him to these four players: because they're the only ones left who are even in the same neighborhood as a pure scorer.
Is he necessarily a better scorer than someone like Kevin Love though?
There's clearly a volume/efficiency tradeoff here, with Love's slightly better ability to avoid TOVs offseting a lower TS...I don't see much difference.
In other aspects: -Love is much better at rebounding, (17.0 vs 12.1, and when Love played closer to the basket, it was even more) McHale didn't increase TRBs when Bird was missing in '89, so it's not that.. -Love is a great passing big men while Mchale isn't (21.4% AST vs 9.8% AST) -Love has more range and can therefore stretch defenses better, making him deadly in a PnR situation in a way that McHale can't be.
These factors all point to Love exerting more non-boxscore offensive impact than McHale, meaning there's a good chance Love is a better offensive player than McHale overall, does the latter's advantage on D counteract this?
See, a problem with Love is that, even though he is a phenomenal 3 point shooter, in terms of his actual shot, it doesent seem very good outside of 3 point territory.
I mean, in 2013-2014 he improved on this, and shot 40% from there. But he shot 34% from 10-16 feet, midrange.
I do believe that he deserves a mention. wasnt his rebound percentage 19%?
My Ballot is
Mchale
Love
cant think of a third one
He shot 35% from that area that season, given how little he actually operates from there (9.1% of FGA), I don't see that as a big impediment to his efficacy
trex_8063 wrote:
theonlyclutch wrote:
trex_8063 wrote:I will again express my feelings of perplexity that Kevin McHale does not have more traction at this point. I've outlined this above, but again: he was averaging 31.9 pts/100 possessions @ 65.5% TS (+11.73% to league average ) that year, while playing next to another superstar level scorer (the attention that draws away from McHale may help his efficiency, but it was also draws away from his volume).
So I'm not sure that McHale (at his peak) isn't the best rebounder out of this group of guys too. So among these five guys he's arguably the best pure scorer, arguably the best rebounder, without a doubt the best defensive player, and definitely not last as a passer either. And just to re-iterate why I'm comparing him to these four players: because they're the only ones left who are even in the same neighborhood as a pure scorer.
Is he necessarily a better scorer than someone like Kevin Love though?
There's clearly a volume/efficiency tradeoff here,
Added in the relative TS% to better illustrate how far from the mean both players are. I don't think the +3.5 pts/100 possession is a fair or even trade-off for ~6.5% better shooting efficiency. Seriously, that's like the difference between '15 Cousins and '11 Dirk Nowitzki. Also consider McHale did this while playing +3.4 mpg......so if pace were the same, Love would come out only like +0.2 ppg with those per 100 numbers.......meanwhile McHale's clearly a couple tiers ahead in efficiency (again, the difference between Cousins and peak Nowitzki).
Now that's a big exaggeration right there, given that Cousins best ORTG was 107, which is miles away from whatever Nowitzki has done at his peak, due to Cousins being a turnover factory, which uses possessions, while Nowitzki is the exact opposite, there's no such disparity within the Love/Mchale comparison here
theonlyclutch wrote:with Love's slightly better ability to avoid TOVs offseting a lower TS...I don't see much difference.
idk, "slightly" seems the operative word there. Love avg 3.5 tov/100 possessions with a TOV% of 10.3. McHale avg 3.1 tov/100 poss with a TOV% of 11.4. There's not a ton of difference there, not enough to totally off-set the difference in efficiency, imo. Even factoring in Love's passing:
theonlyclutch wrote:-Love is a great passing big men while Mchale isn't (21.4% AST vs 9.8% AST)
No argument here, he's def the better passer, and the best outlet passer of his generation imo. But even reviewing their respective ORtg's (which factors in pts, shooting efficiency, asts, and tovs): '14 Love: 120 ORtg (+13.3 to league avg, +11.1 to team avg) '87 McHale: 125 ORtg (+16.7 to league avg, +11.5 to team avg----a team that contained Bird, Parish, and Ainge)
I won't imply the margin is big; but I do believe McHale (at his peak) was a little better offensive hub than Love.
Shouldn't volume be taken into account of?
McHale is taking 24.2% USG & 9.8 AST% Love is taking 28.8% USG & 21.7 AST%
That's a way higher burden on Love either way.
And speaking of the phrasing "offensive hub", there is a well-documented trend of post-up bigs having very mediocre offensive impact compared to their production, especially if they are not good passers, what makes McHale so different?
theonlyclutch wrote:In other aspects: -Love is much better at rebounding, (17.0 vs 12.1, and when Love played closer to the basket, it was even more) McHale didn't increase TRBs when Bird was missing in '89, so it's not that..
No argument here. Love's a significantly better rebounder.
theonlyclutch wrote:-Love has more range and can therefore stretch defenses better, making him deadly in a PnR situation in a way that McHale can't be.
This is conjecture, and it works both ways. I'll play the other side: I feel Love's superior range is largely a product of era, where such skills are STRONGLY encouraged and nurtured in big men (not the case in McHale's time). I feel McHale's capable of developing this skill had it been required of him; but teams barely shot threes in the 1980's (not even the guards), and were just barely getting on board with it in the early 90's. And note that in the last two years of his prime he hit 45 of 120 (37.5%) 3pt attempts (rs and playoffs combined). For comparison, Love's combined rs 3pt% over the last 5+ seasons is 36.7%. Now, that's on much higher volume, and with perception of Love as a 3pt threat and modern defenses' greater attention to rotating out on to shooters, he no doubt has been taking somewhat more contested treys.....but let's not pretend that bunches of these attempts are super-high degree of difficulty treys, off the dribble and such (92+% of his treys are assisted....so they're still basically spot-ups).
We have other indications of McHale's touch as a shooter, too fwiw (his FT-shooting, for instance: 83.4% over the final 7 years of his career, peaking at 89.3%).
I don't like to deal with hypotheticals that way, but in that case, a more gun-happy Kevin McHale would also detract from the already mediocre rebounding that he was doing, as well as a likely decrease in his offensive efficacy, so it's not like this skill doesn't come with sacrifices.
w.r.t Kevin Love's 3s being spot-ups:
He steadily improved during his 3 healthy years in MIN, taking more and more volume each season at lower assisted rates (85.8% on '14), his shot chart also shows great variety on the shot location of his 3s, so it's not like he was just hanging around in the corners either.
theonlyclutch wrote:These factors all point to Love exerting more non-boxscore offensive impact than McHale, meaning there's a good chance Love is a better offensive player than McHale overall, does the latter's advantage on D counteract this?
Well again, we're seeing things differently here. I don't see that there's much to "counteract". You've implied Love is the better offensive player, but as I outlined above, I actually see the opposite as the case. And wrt non-boxscore offensive impact: despite having what would seem like some of the best box numbers, he was actually only 19th in the league in PI ORAPM (value was less than half that of Lebron or Harden that year; barely more than half that of Chris Paul, too).
That's a bit of the problem right here, PI RAPM is prior-informed, and Love's "prior" in the '13 season just weren't that good, which adversely affects his RAPM here. In any case, his on-off ORTG was very good at +10.3, so he was definitely having great impact on MIN.
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
Sorry I couldn't get in my ballots the last thread, but I was suspended.. Check the OT thread to see more. This will be my last ballot, since I am for now retiring from RealGM. The project was a lot of fun, even though I wanted to contribute a lot more and the participation has been slacking. Great job doing this whole thing trex!
My ballot:
1. Penny 1996 2. Ginobili 2005 3. Pippen 1994
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
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."
Fine with 69, too as it's his statistical peak in the playoffs, but prefer to focus on 70 here. He was certainly deserving of winning reg season MVP that season, leading the knicks to a 60-22 record and the #1 ranked SRS in the league. He put together season averages of 21.7 PPG, 13.9 RPG, 2 APG, 50.7% FG, 75.6% FT, 55.2% TS (+4.1% above league avg) and .227 WS/48 in 81 GP.
On their way to the championship in 1970, willis helped the knicks knock off 2 of the most dominant centers of all time in wilt and kareem. Undersized for a center at 6’9”, his brute strength and good defensive instincts were still able to deter them. He also had a great outside shot for a big man, which was very effective against wilt in his later years.
I don’t doubt that reed was a player whose impact went beyond the box score, and I’d say that’s what voters were recognizing when selecting him as finals MVP that year as well. This was best exemplified in the famous moment when reed came through the tunnel in game 7 of the 70 finals:
As the lakers were warming up, they froze as they saw willis coming onto the court (he had previously missed game 6 with a torn muscle in his thigh, and no one expected him to play). He hit his first 2 jumpers, and the rest was history. Dramatic narrative? Of course, but Clyde himself said they wouldn’t have had the confidence to go out there and perform like they did without their captain leading the way. When you have the talent to back it up as willis did, that makes a difference.
92 CLYDE DREXLER
I think 92 drexler’s getting underrated at this point by how little he’s been mentioned.
Blazers ranked 2nd in SRS that season, and took one of the best teams in NBA history (bulls) to 6 games in the finals. He didn’t shoot great, but he had a solid overall series. I think pippen and penny are right there with him, too, but I just like his overall package a bit better than them. The combo of athleticism, skill set and bball IQ drexler possessed was hard to match, and that was on full display in 92.
Ballot 1 - 1975 Bob McAdoo Ballot 2 - 1994 Scottie Pippen Ballot 3 - 2014 Kevin Love
My only problem with Love is by the eye test I don't think he's as impressive as his numbers. He is a good shooter and post player but is he a special one? He is a better outlet passer than in the halfcourt. I still can't believe he got as many FTA as he did in Minnesota with a decent not amazing off the dribble game. With that said I buy his defense as no worse than average and his stats combined with floor spacing is so good that if I had less reservations about him I would have voted him in earlier.
70sFan wrote:1st ballot - Bob Petit 1963 2nd ballot - Willis Reed 1969/1970 3rd ballot - Bob Lanier 1974/Bob McAdoo 1975
Can someone compare Lanier to McAdoo? I have Big Mac over Lanier before, but after some researches Lanier impressed me as a two-way beast. Right now, it's tie - I can't choose...
Hey sorry man. I just realized I didn't have you listed in the mass-quoting list I've been copying over and over at the start of all threads. Correction is made; if we keep going, you won't be omitted in the future.
Pettit and Lanier are now off the table. You want to go with Reed for your #1 and McAdoo for your #2 ballots? If so, who would be your third?
"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
There's clearly a volume/efficiency tradeoff here, with Love's slightly better ability to avoid TOVs offseting a lower TS...I don't see much difference.
In other aspects: -Love is much better at rebounding, (17.0 vs 12.1, and when Love played closer to the basket, it was even more) McHale didn't increase TRBs when Bird was missing in '89, so it's not that.. -Love is a great passing big men while Mchale isn't (21.4% AST vs 9.8% AST) -Love has more range and can therefore stretch defenses better, making him deadly in a PnR situation in a way that McHale can't be.
These factors all point to Love exerting more non-boxscore offensive impact than McHale, meaning there's a good chance Love is a better offensive player than McHale overall, does the latter's advantage on D counteract this?
See, a problem with Love is that, even though he is a phenomenal 3 point shooter, in terms of his actual shot, it doesent seem very good outside of 3 point territory.
I mean, in 2013-2014 he improved on this, and shot 40% from there. But he shot 34% from 10-16 feet, midrange.
I do believe that he deserves a mention. wasnt his rebound percentage 19%?
My Ballot is
Mchale
Love
cant think of a third one
He shot 35% from that area that season, given how little he actually operates from there (9.1% of FGA), I don't see that as a big impediment to his efficacy
trex_8063 wrote:
theonlyclutch wrote: Is he necessarily a better scorer than someone like Kevin Love though?
There's clearly a volume/efficiency tradeoff here,
Added in the relative TS% to better illustrate how far from the mean both players are. I don't think the +3.5 pts/100 possession is a fair or even trade-off for ~6.5% better shooting efficiency. Seriously, that's like the difference between '15 Cousins and '11 Dirk Nowitzki. Also consider McHale did this while playing +3.4 mpg......so if pace were the same, Love would come out only like +0.2 ppg with those per 100 numbers.......meanwhile McHale's clearly a couple tiers ahead in efficiency (again, the difference between Cousins and peak Nowitzki).
Now that's a big exaggeration right there, given that Cousins best ORTG was 107, which is miles away from whatever Nowitzki has done at his peak, due to Cousins being a turnover factory, which uses possessions, while Nowitzki is the exact opposite, there's no such disparity within the Love/Mchale comparison here
theonlyclutch wrote:with Love's slightly better ability to avoid TOVs offseting a lower TS...I don't see much difference.
idk, "slightly" seems the operative word there. Love avg 3.5 tov/100 possessions with a TOV% of 10.3. McHale avg 3.1 tov/100 poss with a TOV% of 11.4. There's not a ton of difference there, not enough to totally off-set the difference in efficiency, imo. Even factoring in Love's passing:
theonlyclutch wrote:-Love is a great passing big men while Mchale isn't (21.4% AST vs 9.8% AST)
No argument here, he's def the better passer, and the best outlet passer of his generation imo. But even reviewing their respective ORtg's (which factors in pts, shooting efficiency, asts, and tovs): '14 Love: 120 ORtg (+13.3 to league avg, +11.1 to team avg) '87 McHale: 125 ORtg (+16.7 to league avg, +11.5 to team avg----a team that contained Bird, Parish, and Ainge)
I won't imply the margin is big; but I do believe McHale (at his peak) was a little better offensive hub than Love.
Shouldn't volume be taken into account of?
McHale is taking 24.2% USG & 9.8 AST% Love is taking 28.8% USG & 21.7 AST%
That's a way higher burden on Love either way.
And speaking of the phrasing "offensive hub", there is a well-documented trend of post-up bigs having very mediocre offensive impact compared to their production, especially if they are not good passers, what makes McHale so different?
theonlyclutch wrote:In other aspects: -Love is much better at rebounding, (17.0 vs 12.1, and when Love played closer to the basket, it was even more) McHale didn't increase TRBs when Bird was missing in '89, so it's not that..
No argument here. Love's a significantly better rebounder.
theonlyclutch wrote:-Love has more range and can therefore stretch defenses better, making him deadly in a PnR situation in a way that McHale can't be.
This is conjecture, and it works both ways. I'll play the other side: I feel Love's superior range is largely a product of era, where such skills are STRONGLY encouraged and nurtured in big men (not the case in McHale's time). I feel McHale's capable of developing this skill had it been required of him; but teams barely shot threes in the 1980's (not even the guards), and were just barely getting on board with it in the early 90's. And note that in the last two years of his prime he hit 45 of 120 (37.5%) 3pt attempts (rs and playoffs combined). For comparison, Love's combined rs 3pt% over the last 5+ seasons is 36.7%. Now, that's on much higher volume, and with perception of Love as a 3pt threat and modern defenses' greater attention to rotating out on to shooters, he no doubt has been taking somewhat more contested treys.....but let's not pretend that bunches of these attempts are super-high degree of difficulty treys, off the dribble and such (92+% of his treys are assisted....so they're still basically spot-ups).
We have other indications of McHale's touch as a shooter, too fwiw (his FT-shooting, for instance: 83.4% over the final 7 years of his career, peaking at 89.3%).
I don't like to deal with hypotheticals that way, but in that case, a more gun-happy Kevin McHale would also detract from the already mediocre rebounding that he was doing, as well as a likely decrease in his offensive efficacy, so it's not like this skill doesn't come with sacrifices.
w.r.t Kevin Love's 3s being spot-ups:
He steadily improved during his 3 healthy years in MIN, taking more and more volume each season at lower assisted rates (85.8% on '14), his shot chart also shows great variety on the shot location of his 3s, so it's not like he was just hanging around in the corners either.
theonlyclutch wrote:These factors all point to Love exerting more non-boxscore offensive impact than McHale, meaning there's a good chance Love is a better offensive player than McHale overall, does the latter's advantage on D counteract this?
Well again, we're seeing things differently here. I don't see that there's much to "counteract". You've implied Love is the better offensive player, but as I outlined above, I actually see the opposite as the case. And wrt non-boxscore offensive impact: despite having what would seem like some of the best box numbers, he was actually only 19th in the league in PI ORAPM (value was less than half that of Lebron or Harden that year; barely more than half that of Chris Paul, too).
That's a bit of the problem right here, PI RAPM is prior-informed, and Love's "prior" in the '13 season just weren't that good, which adversely affects his RAPM here. In any case, his on-off ORTG was very good at +10.3, so he was definitely having great impact on MIN.
There's clearly a volume/efficiency tradeoff here,
Added in the relative TS% to better illustrate how far from the mean both players are. I don't think the +3.5 pts/100 possession is a fair or even trade-off for ~6.5% better shooting efficiency. Seriously, that's like the difference between '15 Cousins and '11 Dirk Nowitzki. Also consider McHale did this while playing +3.4 mpg......so if pace were the same, Love would come out only like +0.2 ppg with those per 100 numbers.......meanwhile McHale's clearly a couple tiers ahead in efficiency (again, the difference between Cousins and peak Nowitzki).
Now that's a big exaggeration right there, given that Cousins best ORTG was 107, which is miles away from whatever Nowitzki has done at his peak, due to Cousins being a turnover factory, which uses possessions, while Nowitzki is the exact opposite, there's no such disparity within the Love/Mchale comparison here
I was responding directly to the "volume/efficiency tradeoff" statement, which seemed to imply that Love's +3.5 pts/100 possessions off-sets or otherwise accounts for being a full 6.5% worse in shooting efficiency. I voiced disagreement with said implication, noting that the volume difference isn't all that large, especially considering McHale was playing larger minutes (**and thus more possessions if pace were same); meanwhile the difference in shooting efficiency is almost precisely equal to the difference between '11 Dirk and '15 Boogie. **Perhaps Love could scale up to nearly 40 mpg with no drop-off in per minute/possession volume or efficiency.....though more than likely it would result in some marginal drop-off (nothing huge, perhaps, but perhaps instead of 35.4 pts/100 @ 59.1% TS it's reduced to 35.2 pts/100 @ 58.8% TS or similar......simply result of added fatigue and/or having to pace himself more).
theonlyclutch wrote:with Love's slightly better ability to avoid TOVs offseting a lower TS...I don't see much difference.
idk, "slightly" seems the operative word there. Love avg 3.5 tov/100 possessions with a TOV% of 10.3. McHale avg 3.1 tov/100 poss with a TOV% of 11.4. There's not a ton of difference there, not enough to totally off-set the difference in efficiency, imo. Even factoring in Love's passing:
theonlyclutch wrote:-Love is a great passing big men while Mchale isn't (21.4% AST vs 9.8% AST)
No argument here, he's def the better passer, and the best outlet passer of his generation imo. But even reviewing their respective ORtg's (which factors in pts, shooting efficiency, asts, and tovs): '14 Love: 120 ORtg (+13.3 to league avg, +11.1 to team avg) '87 McHale: 125 ORtg (+16.7 to league avg, +11.5 to team avg----a team that contained Bird, Parish, and Ainge)
I won't imply the margin is big; but I do believe McHale (at his peak) was a little better offensive hub than Love.
Shouldn't volume be taken into account of?
McHale is taking 24.2% USG & 9.8 AST% Love is taking 28.8% USG & 21.7 AST%
That's a way higher burden on Love either way.
And speaking of the phrasing "offensive hub", there is a well-documented trend of post-up bigs having very mediocre offensive impact compared to their production, especially if they are not good passers, what makes McHale so different?
I'm not aware of the documented evidence that covers this "well-documented trend" you're referring to, but I'm open to reading about it. As to volume being taken into account...... Fair point, though fwiw in the 8 games McHale played in '87 WITHOUT Bird, his usage was ~25.8%. He averaged 28.0 ppg (~34.6 pts/100 possessions), 3.0 apg (~12.6% AST%), 2.0 topg (8.6% TOV%) @ 65.6% TS with an ORtg of ~130.7 in those eight games.
And fwiw, I'm not crazy about using TOV% alone as a measure of how TO-prone a player is. I don't like the format of the equation: [turnovers/(true shot attempts + turnovers)]*100. It doesn't consider all the times a player touches the ball where the result of said touch isn't either a shot attempt or turnover (particularly boggling to me that assists are not somehow factored into it). I tend to use a combination of TOV% and TO/100 possessions to get an idea of how tov-prone someone is. And while Love had the slightly better TOV%, he had the slightly worse tov/100 numbers.
theonlyclutch wrote:In other aspects: -Love is much better at rebounding, (17.0 vs 12.1, and when Love played closer to the basket, it was even more) McHale didn't increase TRBs when Bird was missing in '89, so it's not that..
No argument here. Love's a significantly better rebounder.
theonlyclutch wrote:-Love has more range and can therefore stretch defenses better, making him deadly in a PnR situation in a way that McHale can't be.
This is conjecture, and it works both ways. I'll play the other side: I feel Love's superior range is largely a product of era, where such skills are STRONGLY encouraged and nurtured in big men (not the case in McHale's time). I feel McHale's capable of developing this skill had it been required of him; but teams barely shot threes in the 1980's (not even the guards), and were just barely getting on board with it in the early 90's. And note that in the last two years of his prime he hit 45 of 120 (37.5%) 3pt attempts (rs and playoffs combined). For comparison, Love's combined rs 3pt% over the last 5+ seasons is 36.7%. Now, that's on much higher volume, and with perception of Love as a 3pt threat and modern defenses' greater attention to rotating out on to shooters, he no doubt has been taking somewhat more contested treys.....but let's not pretend that bunches of these attempts are super-high degree of difficulty treys, off the dribble and such (92+% of his treys are assisted....so they're still basically spot-ups).
We have other indications of McHale's touch as a shooter, too fwiw (his FT-shooting, for instance: 83.4% over the final 7 years of his career, peaking at 89.3%).
I don't like to deal with hypotheticals that way, but in that case, a more gun-happy Kevin McHale would also detract from the already mediocre rebounding that he was doing, as well as a likely decrease in his offensive efficacy, so it's not like this skill doesn't come with sacrifices.
I don't think you have any choice but to consider era trends and influences if you want to make cross-era comparisons. I could just as easily say that there was no one (NO ONE) who played in NBA (at any position) the 1960's and 70's who was proficient (by today's standards) at shooting from beyond 23'9"......and I'd be absolutely right. Now the obvious counterpoint would be to point out "but trex: they didn't have any reason to shoot from that far away; there was no 3pt line." Which gets to the heart of what I'm saying: era influences matter.
Players will not hone an unused or unnecessary skill just for the hell of it. The skill needs to have a utility for it to be worth anything, which then provides the reason/motivation for the player (not to mention spurs the nurturing behaviors of the organization to develop said skills). Offensive schemes of McHale's day were not predicated on their bigs being able to shoot from deep and stretch the floor, etc. Even the guards of the 1980's barely shot any treys. Note, for example, that the team that led the league in 3PA in '87 averaged 7.96 3PA/g......as a team. Stephen Curry as an individual averaged 8.08 3PA/g last year; and there was not a single team last year that didn't average MORE THAN TWICE that league-leading 7.96 per game.
I, right now, am unable to ride a skateboard or juggle three balls. It's not because I'm fundamentally incapable of doing these things; it's just that I've never had the inclination to practice or seek instruction at them. Kevin McHale had likely never shot more than a handful of shots from beyond 20-22 feet in his life prior to the late 1980's/early 1990's......not because he couldn't, but because prior to that time it would have been a waste of his time to practice such skills.
w.r.t Kevin Love's 3s being spot-ups:
He steadily improved during his 3 healthy years in MIN, taking more and more volume each season at lower assisted rates (85.8% on '14), his shot chart also shows great variety on the shot location of his 3s, so it's not like he was just hanging around in the corners either.
By "spot-ups" I didn't necessarily mean he's just camping out behind the line waiting for the ball. But even in '14 (the 85.8% assisted you noted)......that's 6 of every 7 treys he makes which are catch-and-shoot plays. That's all I'm saying: that the majority of his attempts are catch-and-shoot, and he's still not draining them at overtly better %'s than what McHale seemed capable of upon the very first years of his entire life/career that he ever started shooting from deep with any semi-regularity.
theonlyclutch wrote:These factors all point to Love exerting more non-boxscore offensive impact than McHale, meaning there's a good chance Love is a better offensive player than McHale overall, does the latter's advantage on D counteract this?
Well again, we're seeing things differently here. I don't see that there's much to "counteract". You've implied Love is the better offensive player, but as I outlined above, I actually see the opposite as the case. And wrt non-boxscore offensive impact: despite having what would seem like some of the best box numbers, he was actually only 19th in the league in PI ORAPM (value was less than half that of Lebron or Harden that year; barely more than half that of Chris Paul, too).
That's a bit of the problem right here, PI RAPM is prior-informed, and Love's "prior" in the '13 season just weren't that good, which adversely affects his RAPM here. In any case, his on-off ORTG was very good at +10.3, so he was definitely having great impact on MIN.
His PI ORAPM in '14 was +2.81 (19th in league). In '13 it was +2.07 (somewhere in the mid-30's in league). If they drew off of '12 at all (some PI formulas do draw from the previous TWO years), he was +2.70 (25th in league) that year. So yeah, it's dragging him down, but not by any super-relevant amount. And certainly he's having significant impact in MIN. Point is: his offensive impact does not exceed what we might assume based on his offensive box/advanced metrics (this "non-boxscore impact" you referred to.......in fact, his offensive impact might still fall marginally short of expectation----the expectation created by his box metrics, I mean).
"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
Kevin McHale - 6 Bob McAdoo - 4 Kevin Love - 3 Penny Hardaway - 3 Scottie Pippen - 3 Bernard King - 3 Connie Hawkins - 2 Willis Reed - 2 Manu Ginobili - 2 Clyde Drexler - 1
REMINDER: The scheduled termination of this thread (and possibly the project) is tonight.
Dr Spaceman wrote:.
Mutnt wrote:.
RSCD_3 wrote:.
Quotatious wrote:.
Dr Positivity wrote:.
drza wrote:.
eminence wrote:.
yoyoboy wrote:.
RebelWithoutACause wrote:.
LA Bird wrote:.
MyUniBroDavis wrote:.
Gregoire wrote:.
PaulieWal wrote:.
The-Power wrote:.
SKF_85 wrote:.
Narigo wrote:.
Joao Saraiva wrote:.
PCProductions wrote:.
Moonbeam wrote:.
theonlyclutch wrote:.
BallerHogger wrote:.
michievous wrote:.
JordansBulls wrote:.
thizznation wrote:.
SideshowBob wrote:.
fpliii wrote:.
Owly wrote:.
70sFan wrote:.
"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 problem with McHale is that he never put it all together in terms of having an all-time great regular season AND playoffs in the same year. Sure, he had a broken foot for the last two or three months of the 1986-87 season, and still played really well considering how much pain he had to endure (not only that broken foot, but also a sprained ankle in the playoffs), but he clearly wasn't even close to 100%, particularly on defense, he didn't have the same kind of mobility as usual. His '86 playoffs were much better, but I can't quite convince myself to vote for '86 as his peak, because his '87 RS (much bigger sample) was clearly superior - much higher scoring volume AND higher efficiency. Scoring was his biggest strength as a player, so I think it's really important that he was better in this regard in '87. But he'll get my vote here, he was still a special player.
Hawkins over McHale may seem weird, considering how McHale was much better defensively, and he looks better based on per 100 possession numbers, but Connie carried his team as the only superstar, and improved his game in the playoffs (opposite of McHale in '87, who declined in the playoffs - even with an asterisk because of that foot injury, there's still a noticeable decline compared to RS, and he played with other stars, or even a player better than McHale himself was in Bird - I don't think we can just ignore what Hawkins did that season - even if the league he played in was weak compared to 1987 NBA, he was still like '91 Michael Jordan of that league).
I've never had a satisfactory criteria for peaks (especially with my general low ranking playoff performance - but playoffs playing such a large role in people's perceptions of how a player's year went).
But as I've tried to follow I'll throw in the best numbers guys. Mikan Amar'e Johnston Schayes Arizin
The issue with all but Amar'e is these peaks are coming in the 50s, mostly early-to-mid fifties, and it's hard to translate that (unless simply equating dominance within the league - in which case they'd already be in). Amar'e's problems are dreadful defense, and a perception that Nash was adding a lot of that value; and the Suns doing well without him doesn't help his defense on either count.
Next are McAdoo Bellamy Brandon Brand
McAdoo has the same issue as Amare in terms of D (though with more defensive upside in the right scheme as flashed by the defensive boxscore, and his role in the Lakers 1-3-1 zone - though how much arguably latent potential matters in this process ...), his metrics are worse but it might be argued he was in a league where it was harder to put up extreme metrics (he led the league in WS/48 and PER once each ahead of peak-ish Jabbar). Bellamy is like Johnston in terms of team performance and (to a lesser extent) era concerns, but with more explicit questioning of work ethic and the value of his numbers. Brand and Brandon are unheralded - they might have a case based on a lack of obvious defects or that may be a lack of scrutiny into careers that aren't considered elite.
Then ... Ed Macauley - Era, D. Emanuel Ginobili - Minutes Arvydas Sabonis - Minutes Adrian Dantley - Questions on team impact (though it has been argued team weaknesses aren't areas he'd be expected to contribute - e.g. offensive rebounding) Robert Parish - Foul trouble - "meh" playoffs (though not as bad as some mid 80s ones) Larry Foust - Era Grant Hill Kevin Love - Defense Harry Gallatin - Era Pau Gasol - "2nd banana" Anfernee Hardaway John Stockton - "2nd banana", relative non-scorer Yao Ming - Injuries Kevin McHale - Injury blighted end to best RS year. Black hole. Chauncey Billups - Bernard King - "Just" a scorer? Personal problems manifested at other points, part of who he is? John Drew - The above with less legendary status Brandon Roy - Ball dominant? Clyde Drexler - Rick Barry - A "jerk"? Not efficient? Team won with D
All with the most obvious concerns. Only used NBA numbers, otherwise Hawkins would be up at the top there but in a really poor league (and as ever not really sure how to account for that but it seems like a fairly large hit).
I'd probably look at McAdoo, then Brandon, Brand, Parish, Dantley and Hill (whilst wondering if McHale's D puts him in the conversation, and what wandering about Hawkins but looking at his and Spencer Haywood's NBA drop - a somewhat analagous situation without any injury -and leaving him for the time being).
Owly wrote:I've never had a satisfactory criteria for peaks (especially with my general low ranking playoff performance - but playoffs playing such a large role in people's perceptions of how a player's year went).
But as I've tried to follow I'll throw in the best numbers guys. Mikan Amar'e Johnston Schayes Arizin
The issue with all but Amar'e is these peaks are coming in the 50s, mostly early-to-mid fifties, and it's hard to translate that (unless simply equating dominance within the league - in which case they'd already be in). Amar'e's problems are dreadful defense, and a perception that Nash was adding a lot of that value; and the Suns doing well without him doesn't help his defense on either count.
fwiw, I wanted to include all years of the NBA/BAA/ABA for consideration, but was voted down: it was agreed to consider only the shot-clock era of NBA/ABA. That effectively removed Mikan entirely from consideration, took away Arizin's probable peak season ('52), as well as what is potentially the peak season of Schayes and Johnston ('54).
Totally agree regarding Amar'e. I'm not ready to lend him support yet as a result, not for at least 10-12 more spots.
Owly wrote:Next are McAdoo Bellamy Brandon Brand
McAdoo has the same issue as Amare in terms of D (though with more defensive upside in the right scheme as flashed by the defensive boxscore, and his role in the Lakers 1-3-1 zone - though how much arguably latent potential matters in this process ...), his metrics are worse but it might be argued he was in a league where it was harder to put up extreme metrics (he led the league in WS/48 and PER once each ahead of peak-ish Jabbar). Bellamy is like Johnston in terms of team performance and (to a lesser extent) era concerns, but with more explicit questioning of work ethic and the value of his numbers. Brand and Brandon are unheralded - they might have a case based on a lack of obvious defects or that may be a lack of scrutiny into careers that aren't considered elite.
I think putting McAdoo's defense on the same level with Amar'e is a touch harsh, especially considering he was railroaded into playing much of his career at a position he was too small for. Agree regarding Bellamy (and to a lesser degree Johnston). Brand is someone I'd be comfortable with getting traction any time now.
Owly wrote:Then ... Ed Macauley - Era, D. Larry Foust - Era Harry Gallatin - Era
Macauley's peak was likely '53, and Gallatin's either '53 or '54 (out of consideration for reason mentioned above). Foust's was probably '55 or '56, but yeah.....weak era concerns.
Owly wrote:Emanuel Ginobili - Minutes Arvydas Sabonis - Minutes Adrian Dantley - Questions on team impact (though it has been argued team weaknesses aren't areas he'd be expected to contribute - e.g. offensive rebounding) Robert Parish - Foul trouble - "meh" playoffs (though not as bad as some mid 80s ones)
Generally agree. "Meh" maybe marginally overstates my opinion of Parish's playoffs in his peak years (between '81 and '82 for me).
Owly wrote:Grant Hill Kevin Love - Defense Anfernee Hardaway
Though I'm not personally giving them any ballots yet, any one of these guys is a potentially valid candidate (or at least really close to it) imo. Also, I think Love's defensive failings are being overstated where '14 is concerned. I think his defense was legitimately problematic in his early years (up to maybe '12 or so); but I don't believe that's the case in '14.
Owly wrote:Pau Gasol - "2nd banana" John Stockton - "2nd banana", relative non-scorer Yao Ming - Injuries
I must admit, I've not taken a real close look at Yao yet; will need to do so. My gut tells me "not quite yet", but if the project continues I'll perhaps do a write-up of him a little later. Stockton in particular I think could be a valid inclusion any time now.
Owly wrote:Kevin McHale - Injury blighted end to best RS year. Black hole.
Re: "black hole". But if you're not turnover-prone and also capable of scoring at ~65% TS type of accuracy, is it really a particularly bad thing if you don't give up the ball? Re: "injury blight". As I've stated above, I'm more forgiving of this particular injury-riddled end to the season than I might be of others. This isn't an inherent durability issue, or his chronic pains/injuries coming to a head. With some players in specific seasons, their break-down at the end of the year is inevitable because of the wear they take during the year. Almost regardless of circumstance (other than sitting them most of the rs), they would ALWAYS be hindered by the time the post-season rolls around. This wasn't the case with McHale in '87. He broke a bone on a fluky kind of occurrence: this was bad luck, plain and simple. That play doesn't occur, we'd likely have seen rs version of him in the post-season. I'm not saying ignore the injury entirely; I'm just suggesting it should be viewed with a touch more leniency than some other injuries.
Owly wrote:Chauncey Billups -
I'm not quite ready for him, but I certainly see the case. I think he'd be as valid a pick as Love at this point.
Owly wrote:Bernard King - "Just" a scorer? Personal problems manifested at other points, part of who he is? John Drew - The above with less legendary status
I agree regarding King. While he's not a defensive liability like Gervin (another mega-scorer), nor is he remotely special as a defender. Not particularly noteworthy in other regards either. So I'm not quite ready for him.
Drew, honestly, hadn't even crossed my mind. My gut says "nah", but I'll have to take a closer look.
Owly wrote:Brandon Roy - Ball dominant? Clyde Drexler - Rick Barry - A "jerk"? Not efficient? Team won with D
I tend to put Roy a little behind Drexler and Barry (who both would be valid candidates at this point, imo, or at least really close). Roy.....there's at least a handful of others I'd need to see voted in before I'd be ready to give him any serious consideration.
Owly wrote:All with the most obvious concerns. Only used NBA numbers, otherwise Hawkins would be up at the top there but in a really poor league (and as ever not really sure how to account for that but it seems like a fairly large hit).
Perhaps, but not as big as the hit on ALL of the 1950's players you mentioned. Say what you will about the '68 ABA, but at the very least I feel it was a stronger league than the pre-shotclock era, and probably the first 2-3 years with the shotclock, too. I think it was at least '57 or '58 before the NBA was tougher league than the '68 ABA.
Owly wrote:I'd probably look at McAdoo, then Brandon, Brand, Parish, Dantley and Hill (whilst wondering if McHale's D puts him in the conversation, and what wandering about Hawkins but looking at his and Spencer Haywood's NBA drop - a somewhat analagous situation without any injury -and leaving him for the time being).
By "without any injury" you're referring only to Haywood, right? I'd noted in detail evidence of the effect of the injury Hawkin's sustained late in '69.
Also, why does McHale's D need to be stellar to even put him in the conversation? At his peak he's a pure scorer on the level with Bernard King.
"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
Owly wrote:Pau Gasol - "2nd banana" John Stockton - "2nd banana", relative non-scorer Yao Ming - Injuries
I must admit, I've not taken a real close look at Yao yet; will need to do so. My gut tells me "not quite yet", but if the project continues I'll perhaps do a write-up of him a little later. Stockton in particular I think could be a valid inclusion any time now.
Totally spaced on Yao. 05 is definitely worth a look soon:
Any my thing with king is, he was so good offensively that his lack of versatility shouldn’t really be hurting him at this point in the project. I don’t think he was hurting the knicks defensively by any means, and his performance overall including the playoffs that season was excellent. I’m just not sure how many other players left could’ve matched what he did that season if put in the same situation.
) that year, while playing next to another superstar level scorer (the attention that draws away from McHale may help his efficiency, but it was also draws away from his volume). 
