Raw plus/minus for 93-94, 94-95, 95-96 seasons

Moderator: Doctor MJ

colts18
Head Coach
Posts: 6,695
And1: 2,416
Joined: Jun 29, 2009

Re: Raw plus/minus for 93-94, 94-95, 95-96 seasons 

Post#161 » by colts18 » Tue Sep 23, 2014 11:05 pm

I compiled all of the 76ers plus/minus (Net, Offense, defense) into 1 spreadsheet.

Here it is (20 seasons of data)

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... ej-jREuUo/

There is also a tab at the end of the spreadsheet that has career totals during the 1977-1996 span. For example, here is the data for the top 3 Sixers minutes players during that span:

Code: Select all

Player   Min   On    Off   Total Net    Offense on   Off off   Off Net   Def on   Def off   Def Net
Erving   28677   4.8   2.3   2.5   107.4   104.8   2.6   102.7   102.5   0.2
Cheeks   28583   5.0   -0.2   5.2   109.0   106.1   2.9   104.0   106.4   -2.4
Barkley   22761   3.2   -3.6   6.8   112.1   104.6   7.6   109.0   108.2   0.8
User avatar
aIvin adams
Analyst
Posts: 3,041
And1: 1,978
Joined: Jun 24, 2009
   

Re: Raw plus/minus for 93-94, 94-95, 95-96 seasons 

Post#162 » by aIvin adams » Wed Sep 24, 2014 1:07 am

today i learned that Tom Thibadeau was using his own player efficiency formula to rank each player by position as far back as 2006

(http://www.nba.com/media/sixers/Pollack ... _Stats.pdf at page 67)

thanks, PC board. yer the best
Image
Doctor MJ
Senior Mod
Senior Mod
Posts: 41,024
And1: 9,051
Joined: Mar 10, 2005
Location: Treys are for 'Kicks!...and Steph Curry
   

Re: Raw plus/minus for 93-94, 94-95, 95-96 seasons 

Post#163 » by Doctor MJ » Wed Sep 24, 2014 4:46 am

Some great work here folks.

And I'd agree that this certainly says great things about Jones and Cheeks, while not making Erving look so good. I still think it's easy to go too far with data like this pretty easily, but yeah, I don't think Erving had the night & day impact we'd ideally like to see players have in the NBA. I believe he did in the ABA, and that there isn't any reason why he wouldn't have in the NBA with a better fit, but in the early years the 76ers were a fit-mess, and later on, well Erving was still a great player, but he wasn't one of these guys who seems to have prime "hang time" because his BBIQ and team stability compensates completely for his loss of athleticism.
In another world...
Your Longshoremen of Long Beach...

And now introducing...
The Song of Westeros...
LeBron James
John Stockton
Bobby Jones
Rudy Gobert
Khris Middleton
Connie Hawkins
Otto Porter
Ryan Anderson
Doctor MJ
Senior Mod
Senior Mod
Posts: 41,024
And1: 9,051
Joined: Mar 10, 2005
Location: Treys are for 'Kicks!...and Steph Curry
   

Re: Raw plus/minus for 93-94, 94-95, 95-96 seasons 

Post#164 » by Doctor MJ » Wed Sep 24, 2014 5:37 am

lorak wrote:You were thinking that Blaylock’s numbers were impressive? Then look at Cheeks’! Great defensive point guard who also was good (and sometimes VERY good) on offense. And his ’86 on/off net is one of the best results among all players with +/- data available. That’s basically peak KG or LeBron territory and seems like it wasn’a a fluke, because in ’85 or ’83 Cheeks’ net was also great.


Also interesting about Cheeks in '86:

He led the entire league in minutes that year.

So, this isn't a low minute guy, this was a huge minute guy with obscene on/off. I don't think I've ever seen that happen without all the regression data agreeing with the raw data.
In another world...
Your Longshoremen of Long Beach...

And now introducing...
The Song of Westeros...
LeBron James
John Stockton
Bobby Jones
Rudy Gobert
Khris Middleton
Connie Hawkins
Otto Porter
Ryan Anderson
colts18
Head Coach
Posts: 6,695
And1: 2,416
Joined: Jun 29, 2009

Re: Raw plus/minus for 93-94, 94-95, 95-96 seasons 

Post#165 » by colts18 » Wed Sep 24, 2014 5:44 am

Doctor MJ wrote:
He led the entire league in minutes that year.

So, this isn't a low minute guy, this was a huge minute guy with obscene on/off. I don't think I've ever seen that happen without all the regression data agreeing with the raw data.

You got it wrong. It makes perfect sense that he led the league in Minutes played while having a crazy good on/off. Look at all the on/off leaders, they all played high minutes. The highest on/off we have seen came from KG's 03 season. It was propelled by a -17 off rating. KG played a ton of minutes that season. Lets say he played half of the minutes, I guarantee you his on/off would be much lower. His on rating would stay similar, but his off rating will increase because of larger sample. No chance the 03 TWolves finish with a -17 off rating if KG only plays 2000 minutes that season. The lower the off minutes, the higher the on/off rating will be.
Doctor MJ
Senior Mod
Senior Mod
Posts: 41,024
And1: 9,051
Joined: Mar 10, 2005
Location: Treys are for 'Kicks!...and Steph Curry
   

Re: Raw plus/minus for 93-94, 94-95, 95-96 seasons 

Post#166 » by Doctor MJ » Wed Sep 24, 2014 5:53 am

colts18 wrote:
Doctor MJ wrote:
He led the entire league in minutes that year.

So, this isn't a low minute guy, this was a huge minute guy with obscene on/off. I don't think I've ever seen that happen without all the regression data agreeing with the raw data.


You got it wrong. It makes perfect sense that he led the league in Minutes played while having a crazy good on/off. Look at all the on/off leaders, they all played high minutes. The highest on/off we have seen came from KG's 03 season. It was propelled by a -17 off rating. KG played a ton of minutes that season. Lets say he played half of the minutes, I guarantee you his on/off would be much lower. His on rating would stay similar, but his off rating will increase because of larger sample. No chance the 03 TWolves finish with a -17 off rating if KG only plays 2000 minutes that season. The lower the off minutes, the higher the on/off rating will be.


So, you're trying to use the similarity with Kevin Garnett to show me how UNimpressive Cheeks really was?

I catch your drift though: You're saying playing so many minutes makes the OFF numbers all the more susceptible to noise, and you're quite right. Still if I'm being asked which on the face of it is more meaningful: Big +/- in big minutes or in small minutes, I'll certainly say big minutes. Do you disagree?
In another world...
Your Longshoremen of Long Beach...

And now introducing...
The Song of Westeros...
LeBron James
John Stockton
Bobby Jones
Rudy Gobert
Khris Middleton
Connie Hawkins
Otto Porter
Ryan Anderson
User avatar
ronnymac2
RealGM
Posts: 10,492
And1: 4,365
Joined: Apr 11, 2008
   

Re: Raw plus/minus for 93-94, 94-95, 95-96 seasons 

Post#167 » by ronnymac2 » Wed Sep 24, 2014 8:43 am

lorak wrote:I need to do more research about Cheeks, but yes, so far everything indicate he was such player.

- Bo Outlaw, who probably was awful offensively, yet his net on/of during these three seasons is +12.1, +10.5 and +8.4. And that's not a fluke as in '97 his net is +14.8, +3.1 in '98 and +11.6 in '00 (in 99 he didn't play much)

and honorable mention:

- Penny ;] yes, I know, he is well known as great player, but I think most people don't realize how really great he was before injuries destroyed him. As a rookie he had +5.2 net and then +12.1 in '95, + 17.1 in '96 and +12 in '97. What a sad story we lost such great player just when he entered his prime. And he was not only MVP level impact guy, but also beautiful to watch.


— Cheeks is an underrated player of the late 70s/80s, almost as much as peak Mo Lucas. Cheeks was a ball-hawk who could keep up with the point guards of the era and deny penetration better than most. Very efficient player — shot 57% one year! Made good decisions feeding all the great offensive players Philly had in the 1980s. When people gawk over Rajon Rondo today, I just imagine what would happen if Cheeks played now and was given the primacy and ball-control Rondo has gotten since 2009. I think Rondo is overrated, but I'm honestly not sure if he's half the player Cheeks was.

— Bo Outlaw's boxscore stats look great, too. Most years, he used the possessions he got efficiently (good amount of years with an ORTG over 110). Scored efficiently — career 57.2%TS. Defensively, check this out http://bkref.com/tiny/UvUnP.

— Penny is one of my YouTube favorites. Might have the best peak of any player left in the top-100. How much do you guys think the shortened 3-point line affected Penny's production/impact? His best 3 seasons came with the line shortened.
“Do not go where the path may lead, go instead where there is no path and leave a trail.”
User avatar
ronnymac2
RealGM
Posts: 10,492
And1: 4,365
Joined: Apr 11, 2008
   

Re: Raw plus/minus for 93-94, 94-95, 95-96 seasons 

Post#168 » by ronnymac2 » Wed Sep 24, 2014 11:02 pm

One other I think is going to be Battier-like is Derrick McKey. Efficient player who was a threat out to the arc and one of the most versatile defenders of the era. Solid blocks/steals numbers, too.

Looking at the mid-90s roster of Indy, I'm not sure I see a top-10 defense. It's hard to distinguish McKey's impact from Larry Brown's influence on the team since they both entered in 1994, but McKey looks like the best defender on the team, though I'll give Dale Davis a shout out for his post defense and toughness. Smits was a poor help defender. Miller and Antonio Davis were solid. They were top-10 in defense in 1994 and 1995, which were also the 2 years where McKey played his biggest minutes with Indy.
“Do not go where the path may lead, go instead where there is no path and leave a trail.”
User avatar
RSCD3_
RealGM
Posts: 13,782
And1: 7,121
Joined: Oct 05, 2013
 

Re: Raw plus/minus for 93-94, 94-95, 95-96 seasons 

Post#169 » by RSCD3_ » Thu Sep 25, 2014 1:22 am

Doctor MJ wrote:Some great work here folks.

And I'd agree that this certainly says great things about Jones and Cheeks, while not making Erving look so good. I still think it's easy to go too far with data like this pretty easily, but yeah, I don't think Erving had the night & day impact we'd ideally like to see players have in the NBA. I believe he did in the ABA, and that there isn't any reason why he wouldn't have in the NBA with a better fit, but in the early years the 76ers were a fit-mess, and later on, well Erving was still a great player, but he wasn't one of these guys who seems to have prime "hang time" because his BBIQ and team stability compensates completely for his loss of athleticism.


Doctor MJ, how do you think Mo cheeks would compare to point guards nowadays in impact. Ronnymac said that he had a game like rondo with more scoring prowess BUT the teams he was on were great offensively compared to what boston did.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums
I came here to do two things: get lost and slice **** up & I'm all out of directions.

Butler removing rearview mirror in his car as a symbol to never look back

Peja Stojakovic wrote:Jimmy butler, with no regard for human life
Doctor MJ
Senior Mod
Senior Mod
Posts: 41,024
And1: 9,051
Joined: Mar 10, 2005
Location: Treys are for 'Kicks!...and Steph Curry
   

Re: Raw plus/minus for 93-94, 94-95, 95-96 seasons 

Post#170 » by Doctor MJ » Thu Sep 25, 2014 2:21 am

RSCD3_ wrote:
Doctor MJ wrote:Some great work here folks.

And I'd agree that this certainly says great things about Jones and Cheeks, while not making Erving look so good. I still think it's easy to go too far with data like this pretty easily, but yeah, I don't think Erving had the night & day impact we'd ideally like to see players have in the NBA. I believe he did in the ABA, and that there isn't any reason why he wouldn't have in the NBA with a better fit, but in the early years the 76ers were a fit-mess, and later on, well Erving was still a great player, but he wasn't one of these guys who seems to have prime "hang time" because his BBIQ and team stability compensates completely for his loss of athleticism.


Doctor MJ, how do you think Mo cheeks would compare to point guards nowadays in impact. Ronnymac said that he had a game like rondo with more scoring prowess BUT the teams he was on were great offensively compared to what boston did.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums


Rondo's exactly the guy who comes to mind for me as well. This is what I wrote in a Rondo vs Cheeks thread last year:

Doctor MJ wrote:I'm bummed this hasn't gotten more responses, I think it's a great comparison. Cheeks is the guy Rondo reminds me of, being a super quick, all over the place, master thief guy. He didn't have the freakish aerials & rebounds going though. In a lot of ways, Rondo feels like a supe'd up Cheeks - except for that damned shooting.


So here's the thing though:

I do think Cheeks was more effective than we've ever seen Rondo be.

Part of it is that despite Rondo's great vision, his actual assists in Boston were typically very weak assists. Not saying it's his fault, but Boston had a tendency to shoot mid-to-long twos...which are the types of shots teams know to let the offense have. So we're in this weird situation where Rondo's talent is greater than his proven value...but neither one may be as good as what his assist totals make people think he is.

Cheeks was not given the same primacy. He worked within the talent that existed there having to be both efficient and aggressive. I knew he did it well, but the +/- numbers here open my eyes a bit further.

I cannot claim that I think Rondo could have done it as well. Not the all-around game. The shooting is just too much of an issue.

What about in the other direction? Could Cheeks have thrived with more playmaking primacy? I don't know, but given the issues I've identified with Rondo's Boston playmaker, well, he could at least do that. Rondo may have a ceiling north of Cheeks, but through only what we've seen thus far, the only thing that keeps me from saying "Cheeks by far" is the rebounding.
In another world...
Your Longshoremen of Long Beach...

And now introducing...
The Song of Westeros...
LeBron James
John Stockton
Bobby Jones
Rudy Gobert
Khris Middleton
Connie Hawkins
Otto Porter
Ryan Anderson
fpliii
Analyst
Posts: 3,507
And1: 2,994
Joined: Jan 27, 2013

Re: Raw plus/minus for 93-94, 94-95, 95-96 seasons 

Post#171 » by fpliii » Thu Sep 25, 2014 2:33 am

Doctor MJ wrote:snipped

OT, but now that we have three more years of the Illegal Defense Era, I think I'm more interested in ever in looking at something we discussed in the project threads a couple months back (about the paradigm of the defensive anchor shifting from a Mutombo type -> KG type). The on/off numbers obviously aren't as clean as dRAPM, but maybe they're enough to perform cursory analysis of guys we suspect as elite.
Retired.
Doctor MJ
Senior Mod
Senior Mod
Posts: 41,024
And1: 9,051
Joined: Mar 10, 2005
Location: Treys are for 'Kicks!...and Steph Curry
   

Re: Raw plus/minus for 93-94, 94-95, 95-96 seasons 

Post#172 » by Doctor MJ » Thu Sep 25, 2014 4:50 am

fpliii wrote:
Doctor MJ wrote:snipped

OT, but now that we have three more years of the Illegal Defense Era, I think I'm more interested in ever in looking at something we discussed in the project threads a couple months back (about the paradigm of the defensive anchor shifting from a Mutombo type -> KG type). The on/off numbers obviously aren't as clean as dRAPM, but maybe they're enough to perform cursory analysis of guys we suspect as elite.


Agreed. It's interesting because people focus on the hand check rule, but removing illegal defense to me makes so much more sense as the major move shifting not simply how effective defenses could be but how defenses would have to be to be maximally effective. We seem to be seeing individual defensive number from all different positions that are bigger than we've seen in more recent times without seeing a similar shift on offense.
In another world...
Your Longshoremen of Long Beach...

And now introducing...
The Song of Westeros...
LeBron James
John Stockton
Bobby Jones
Rudy Gobert
Khris Middleton
Connie Hawkins
Otto Porter
Ryan Anderson
User avatar
RebelWithACause
Starter
Posts: 2,191
And1: 530
Joined: Apr 29, 2012

Re: Raw plus/minus for 93-94, 94-95, 95-96 seasons 

Post#173 » by RebelWithACause » Thu Sep 25, 2014 6:37 am

Vlade Divac is somebody that stands out to me but is not mentioned yet.

Looks awesome in 97 NPI RAPM , great in the PI RAPM in 1998 - 2000.
In 94 he looks great as well, and eye popping in 95.
Could very well be that Divac curves out as a high impact player, with a great peak and solid longevity as we get more information.

His defense look much better than his reputation.
User avatar
Clyde Frazier
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 14,335
And1: 13,987
Joined: Sep 07, 2010

Re: Raw plus/minus for 93-94, 94-95, 95-96 seasons 

Post#174 » by Clyde Frazier » Thu Sep 25, 2014 2:29 pm

aIvin adams wrote:today i learned that Tom Thibadeau was using his own player efficiency formula to rank each player by position as far back as 2006

(http://www.nba.com/media/sixers/Pollack ... _Stats.pdf at page 67)

thanks, PC board. yer the best


These are very cool. Random observations...

- "Steve Francis, now with Houston, is one of only five players in NBA history to average at least 15 points,five rebounds and five assists in each of his first five seasons. He joins Oscar Robertson, Michael Jordan, Grant Hill and Magic Johnson." (Off the top of my head, lebron's now on this list as well)

- Amare and Marion not surprisingly ranked 2nd and 3rd in total dunks, which is still pretty impressive being teammates

- Carmelo ranked 5th ahead of LeBron at 11th, which is hard to believe, and eddy curry ranked 6th ahead of tyson chandler. What a waste of talent...

- Players who dunked at least once: blake, felton, duhon, billups, earl watson, TJ ford

- They partnered with 82games.com, and the best 5 man unit that season was Alston / McGrady / Battier / Hayes / Yao

- "Stat crew member Brian Pollack's game job includes counting players with visible tattoos. A check is also made with trainers concerning players who never shed their warm-up suits." :lol:
User avatar
Quotatious
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 17,084
And1: 11,101
Joined: Nov 15, 2013

Re: Raw plus/minus for 93-94, 94-95, 95-96 seasons 

Post#175 » by Quotatious » Thu Sep 25, 2014 2:34 pm

ronnymac2 wrote:— Penny is one of my YouTube favorites. Might have the best peak of any player left in the top-100. How much do you guys think the shortened 3-point line affected Penny's production/impact? His best 3 seasons came with the line shortened.

I love watching Penny, and I'm pretty high on him, as well, but nobody comes even close to Walton, T-Mac and Durant in terms of peak, of the remaining players.
User avatar
ronnymac2
RealGM
Posts: 10,492
And1: 4,365
Joined: Apr 11, 2008
   

Re: Raw plus/minus for 93-94, 94-95, 95-96 seasons 

Post#176 » by ronnymac2 » Thu Sep 25, 2014 7:22 pm

Clyde Frazier wrote:- They partnered with 82games.com, and the best 5 man unit that season was Alston / McGrady / Battier / Hayes / Yao


That's an incredible defensive unit. Even prime Shaq would have trouble scoring on them.

Quotatious wrote:
ronnymac2 wrote:— Penny is one of my YouTube favorites. Might have the best peak of any player left in the top-100. How much do you guys think the shortened 3-point line affected Penny's production/impact? His best 3 seasons came with the line shortened.

I love watching Penny, and I'm pretty high on him, as well, but nobody comes even close to Walton, T-Mac and Durant in terms of peak, of the remaining players.


Well let's start with the perimeter players since it's easier to compare. What makes you say KD and T-Mac are so much better than peak Penny? Penny was the best post player, passer/playmaker, and decision-maker out of the 3, and he was a devastating scorer, too.
“Do not go where the path may lead, go instead where there is no path and leave a trail.”
colts18
Head Coach
Posts: 6,695
And1: 2,416
Joined: Jun 29, 2009

Re: Raw plus/minus for 93-94, 94-95, 95-96 seasons 

Post#177 » by colts18 » Thu Sep 25, 2014 8:48 pm

Malone 4.03
Here is my regressed RAPM results for the 1983 Championship Sixers:

Code: Select all

Malone   6.03
Cheeks   4.94
Erving   4.65
Toney   3.57
B. Jones   4.07
Iavaroni   -0.09
C. Johnson   -1.53
Richardson   -3.07
Cureton   -3.30
Edwards   -2.77
Anderson   -9.59
Schoene   -4.61
McNamara   -10.89
R. Johnson   -7.73



Here is the best career regressed RAPM from 77-96. Note that this includes rookie seasons and end of career seasons which might drag down the average.

Barkley 2.97
B. Jones 2.58
McGinnis 2.10
Erving 1.93
Cheeks 1.75
Hollins 1.20
Toney 1.04
Free 1.03
R. Anderson 0.45
Mix 0.41
Hornacek 0.35
Hawkins 0.28
Dawkins 0.25
Mahorn 0.23
Bibby 0.10
User avatar
Quotatious
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 17,084
And1: 11,101
Joined: Nov 15, 2013

Re: Raw plus/minus for 93-94, 94-95, 95-96 seasons 

Post#178 » by Quotatious » Thu Sep 25, 2014 9:47 pm

ronnymac2 wrote:Well let's start with the perimeter players since it's easier to compare. What makes you say KD and T-Mac are so much better than peak Penny? Penny was the best post player, passer/playmaker, and decision-maker out of the 3, and he was a devastating scorer, too.

I think that Durant's scoring volume/efficiency combination, which is one of the very best of all-time, makes him a clearly better overall player than Penny. Also, Durant is the better rebounder (well, that's obvious, he's a 6'10''/6'11'' SF compared to a 6'7'' combo guard), and while Penny was a much better ballhandler/playmaker, KD isn't bad in these areas anymore (speaking of 2014 Durant). Defensively, I don't think there's any significant gap, to be honest. Penny was a bit better, but not by much, and he wasn't really a game changer on D. Above average, also got 2 steals per game, but that's about it. Durant has a really big edge in stats like PER and WS/48 (29.8 to 24.6 PER, 29.5 to 22.9 WS/48).

I think that Durant is already roughly in the same ballpark as peak Wade, Kobe and T-Mac (top 15-20 level), while Hardaway to me is on the very same level as Drexler (about top 25-30) - still really great, but more like a second tier superstar, not top 3 level, like Kobe/Wade/T-Mac/Durant.

Now, how about T-Mac? He's IMO at the same level as Durant, in terms of peak. He's a much less efficient scorer than KD (although still very efficient, +4.5% league average TS, +3.2% eFG in 2003), but he also played on a worse team, where he had to create a lot more for himself on a consistent basis, and a lot more of Durant's shots were assisted on. McGrady was a better ballhandler and playmaker than Durant, in fact his AST/TOV% ratio was clearly better than Penny's, despite the fact that McGrady was a SG (T-Mac's assist/turnover ratio was +3.57, compared to +2.39 for PH), so combined with his advantage in terms of scoring/USG% (Penny was a bit more efficient as a scorer than T-Mac, but their volume and usage% isn't even worth comparing), I think it's very clear that McGrady was the better overall offensive player. Penny was better defensively, but that's largely dependent on team structure - McGrady had to carry his team offensively, all by himself, so he couldn't give consistent effort defensively, while Penny played on a strong, winning team, so it was much easier for him to play well on both ends (even with Shaq missing a ton of RS games in 1996, Penny's team was still clearly better than T-Mac's, as Hardaway had Horace Grant, Nick Anderson and Dennis Scott - don't even get me started on Tracy's teammates in 2003...). Also, McGrady's advantage over Hardaway in PER and WS/48 is very similar to Durant's (really big).

It's true that Penny was the best post player of the 3, but how valuable is that in the grand scheme of things? I don't think it's all that important, to be honest. As a decision maker, I think that T-Mac easily rivals Penny, seeing his overall efficiency (on a bad team, which is IMO a pretty important notion here).

I wouldn't call Penny a "devastating" scorer. He was certainly a very, very good scorer, but "devastating" applies to Durant and McGrady (32 PPG on great efficiency is devastating, not 21-22 PPG on a very similar efficiency)
User avatar
Dipper 13
Starter
Posts: 2,271
And1: 1,403
Joined: Aug 23, 2010

Re: Raw plus/minus for 93-94, 94-95, 95-96 seasons 

Post#179 » by Dipper 13 » Thu Sep 25, 2014 9:54 pm

fpliii wrote:What other elite offensive rebounders do we have on record for whom to check Net ORtg?


Depending on how far back the plus/minus data goes, another would be Wilt, though you would need multiple years to get a solid sample of off court minutes. Barkley is another obvious one, and he learned a lot from Moses in their two years together. Below is just another example of how relentless Malone was on the glass.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3B58R2Gkmdk&t=5s
User avatar
E-Balla
RealGM
Posts: 30,094
And1: 18,508
Joined: Dec 19, 2012
Location: The Poster Formerly Known As The Gotham City Pantalones
   

Re: Raw plus/minus for 93-94, 94-95, 95-96 seasons 

Post#180 » by E-Balla » Fri Sep 26, 2014 12:08 am

Quotatious wrote:
ronnymac2 wrote:Well let's start with the perimeter players since it's easier to compare. What makes you say KD and T-Mac are so much better than peak Penny? Penny was the best post player, passer/playmaker, and decision-maker out of the 3, and he was a devastating scorer, too.

I think that Durant's scoring volume/efficiency combination, which is one of the very best of all-time, makes him a clearly better overall player than Penny. Also, Durant is the better rebounder (well, that's obvious, he's a 6'10''/6'11'' SF compared to a 6'7'' combo guard), and while Penny was a much better ballhandler/playmaker, KD isn't bad in these areas anymore (speaking of 2014 Durant). Defensively, I don't think there's any significant gap, to be honest. Penny was a bit better, but not by much, and he wasn't really a game changer on D. Above average, also got 2 steals per game, but that's about it. Durant has a really big edge in stats like PER and WS/48 (29.8 to 24.6 PER, 29.5 to 22.9 WS/48).

I think that Durant is already roughly in the same ballpark as peak Wade, Kobe and T-Mac (top 15-20 level), while Hardaway to me is on the very same level as Drexler (about top 25-30) - still really great, but more like a second tier superstar, not top 3 level, like Kobe/Wade/T-Mac/Durant.

Now, how about T-Mac? He's IMO at the same level as Durant, in terms of peak. He's a much less efficient scorer than KD (although still very efficient, +4.5% league average TS, +3.2% eFG in 2003), but he also played on a worse team, where he had to create a lot more for himself on a consistent basis, and a lot more of Durant's shots were assisted on. McGrady was a better ballhandler and playmaker than Durant, in fact his AST/TOV% ratio was clearly better than Penny's, despite the fact that McGrady was a SG (T-Mac's assist/turnover ratio was +3.57, compared to +2.39 for PH), so combined with his advantage in terms of scoring/USG% (Penny was a bit more efficient as a scorer than T-Mac, but their volume and usage% isn't even worth comparing), I think it's very clear that McGrady was the better overall offensive player. Penny was better defensively, but that's largely dependent on team structure - McGrady had to carry his team offensively, all by himself, so he couldn't give consistent effort defensively, while Penny played on a strong, winning team, so it was much easier for him to play well on both ends (even with Shaq missing a ton of RS games in 1996, Penny's team was still clearly better than T-Mac's, as Hardaway had Horace Grant, Nick Anderson and Dennis Scott - don't even get me started on Tracy's teammates in 2003...). Also, McGrady's advantage over Hardaway in PER and WS/48 is very similar to Durant's (really big).

It's true that Penny was the best post player of the 3, but how valuable is that in the grand scheme of things? I don't think it's all that important, to be honest. As a decision maker, I think that T-Mac easily rivals Penny, seeing his overall efficiency (on a bad team, which is IMO a pretty important notion here).

I wouldn't call Penny a "devastating" scorer. He was certainly a very, very good scorer, but "devastating" applies to Durant and McGrady (32 PPG on great efficiency is devastating, not 21-22 PPG on a very similar efficiency)

Penny was a underrated guy by his raw numbers though. Again he averaged 26/5/6 in 20+ games without Shaq (63 TS). On top of that his impact numbers are high and he's been 3rd in MVP voting for a reason. I wouldn't say he's better than them but he's about even with TMac and KD. I trust him more than KD in the playoffs and I can say that strongly.
"The hottest place in Hell is reserved for those who remain neutral in times of great moral conflict." - Martin Luther King

Return to Statistical Analysis