RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #30 (Patrick Ewing)

Moderators: Clyde Frazier, Doctor MJ, trex_8063, penbeast0, PaulieWal

FrogBros4Life
Sophomore
Posts: 138
And1: 155
Joined: Dec 30, 2018

Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #30 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 10/2/23) 

Post#21 » by FrogBros4Life » Mon Oct 2, 2023 5:14 am

Probably too late to make a difference, but I wanted to chime in on Ewing vs. Pippen (and peripherally, Stockton)

While Pippen and Stockton over Ewing both seem like specious arguments, I'm going to (mostly) focus on just the Pippen vs. Ewing comparison here in order to keep this post from becoming any longer than it's already going to be.


The Bulls and Knicks faced off in the playoffs six times during Pippen and Ewing's careers. I think it's safe to say that from 1988-1989 (the first year they met in the playoffs) to 1993-94, Horace Grant was clearly the best player on the Bulls after Jordan and Pippen, while most would agree that either Charles Oakley or John Starks was Ewing's best teammate over this sustained period of time, with perhaps some even prefering Anthony Mason. I want to briefly compare Grant to Oakley, Starks and Mason to examine Pippen and Ewing's teammate quality (excluding Jordan).

Regular Season
=============================

Horace Grant (1989-1994): 35.2 mpg, 13.4 ppg, 9.2 rpg, 2.6 apg, 1.2 spg, 1.1 bpg, 1.4 tov, 56% TS, 17.6 PER, 58.1 WS (.170 W/48), 2.3 BPM, 18.0 VORP

Charles Oakley (1989-1994): 32.3 mpg, 10.4 ppg, 10.5 rpg, 2.2 apg, 1.1 spg, 0.2 bpg, 2.3 tov, 56% TS, 14.0 PER 41.6 WS (.133 W/48), 0.0 BPM, 7.7 VORP

John Starks (1990-1994): 27.7 mpg, 14.6 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 4.4 apg, 1.2 spg, 0.2 bpg, 2.1 tov, 53% TS, 15.9 PER, 22.0 WS (.135 W/48), 2.4 BPM, 8.8 VORP

Anthony Mason (1991-1994): 27.9 mpg, 8.2 ppg, 6.9 rpg, 1.8 apg, 0.5 spg, 0.2 bpg, 1.5 tov, 54% TS, 11.8 PER, 17.9 WS (.130 W/48), -0.3 BPM, 2.9 VORP



In the regular season, Grant grades out as better than all 3 Knicks in PER, WS, WS/48 and VORP, and comes out better in BPM than all but Starks (2.4 to 2.3). FWIW, Grant also grades out as better in PER, WS, WS/48, BPM and VORP in the playoffs, generally speaking, for this period. I don't want to spend too much time focusing on Horace Grant in a Pippen vs. Ewing debate, but if you look at every Bulls vs. Knicks series where Grant was on Chicago's roster you'll see that he played well against them each year aside from the 93 ECF. In fact, other than 93, Grant had a higher GmSc than any of Ewing's teammates in every playoff series except for Mark Jackson in the 89 semifinals.

I want to hammer home the point about Grant (most likely) being better than any of Ewing's teammates these years, because it now begs the question....if Chicago consistently had the two best players on either team, and 3 of the 4 best players between both teams when they met in the playoffs, how/why were the Knicks almost always able to play them so tough?

If there was some extraordinary coaching mismatch going on in the Knicks' favor, then ok, maybe. But clearly the Knicks did not enjoy a huge sideline advantage during these years. So If Pippen was better than Ewing, and Grant was better than Ewing's teammates, and Jordan was better than all of them - the Knicks should have been getting handled rather easily every year with such a disparity in top end talent, no? But this just doesn't correlate with what actually happened.

Moving on from Grant's value relative to Ewing's teammates, I'll compare Ewing and Pippen directly in their head to head matchups


1989 Playoffs, ECSF
===============================

Pippen (36.1 mpg): 14.8 ppg, 7.0 rpg, 4.8 apg, 1.0 spg, 0.7 bpg, 3 tov, 67% TS, 13.3 GmSc

Ewing (38.7 mpg): 21.3 ppg, 10.0 rpg, 3.2 apg, 1.3 spg, 1.8 bpg, 1.8 tov, 55% TS, 18.0 GmSc


1991 Playoffs, 1st Round
==============================

Pippen (40.0 mpg): 19.7 ppg, 8.7 rpg, 5.0 apg, 3.3 spg, 1.3 bpg, 3.3 tov, 55% TS, 17.7 GmSc

Ewing (36.7 mpg): 16.7 ppg, 10.0 rpg, 2.0 apg, 0.3 spg, 1.7 bpg, 1.8 tov, 47% TS, 8.9 GmSc


1992 Playoffs, ECSF
=============================

Pippen (42.3 mpg): 16 ppg, 8.3 rpg, 4.3 apg, 1.4 spg, 1.1 bpg, 2.7 tov, 49% TS, 14.9 GmSc

Ewing (41.1 mpg): 22.1 ppg, 11.1 rpg, 2.4 apg, 0.3 spg, 2.3 bpg, 2.0 tov, 52% TS, 15.9 GmSc


1993 Playoffs, ECF
===========================

Pippen (40.0 mpg): 22.5 ppg, 6.7 rpg, 4.0 apg, 1.8 spg, 0.5 bpg, 4 tov, 57% TS, 15.7 GmSc

Ewing (41.8 mpg): 25.8 ppg, 11.2 rpg, 2.5 apg, 1.7 spg, 1.8 bpg, 2.3 tov, 57% TS, 20.7 GmSc


1994 Playoffs, ECSF
=========================

Pippen (37.6 mpg): 21.7 ppg, 7.7 rpg, 4.7 apg, 2.0 spg, 0.6 bpg, 3.3 tov, 51% TS, 15.6 GmSc

Ewing (42.0 mpg): 22.9 ppg, 12.0 rpg, 2.9 apg, 0.9 spg, 1.9 bpg, 2.7 tov, 58% TS, 18.7 GmSc


1996 Playoffs, ECSF
========================

Pippen (42.8 mpg): 15.6 ppg, 8.2 rpg, 5.2 apg, 3.2 spg, 0.4 bpg, 2.2 tov, 42% TS, 13.0 GmSc

Ewing (41.4 mpg): 23.4 ppg, 11.2 rpg, 1.4 apg, 0.2 spg, 2.8 bpg, 3.8 tov, 53% TS, 15.0 GmSc


It looks fairly obvious that aside from the 3 game sweep in '91 Ewing outperformed Pippen every other year when their two respective teams met in the playoffs, and even '91 looks somewhat questionable if you omit Game 1 of that series (41 point blowout where Ewing gets in early foul trouble, plays just 27 min, and only takes 7 shots and no free throws - he'd average 22 & 12 w/ 2 blocks the next two games). The Knicks may have lost most of their playoff battles against Chicago, but it wasn't because Scottie Pippen was better than Patrick Ewing.

Granted, there's more to ranking any two players than how they fared against one another in head to head contests, but when Player A just outperforms Player B year after year head to head AND has a more impressive statistical footprint in a general sense (regular season and overall playoff output), it seems very unlikely that Player B was the better of the two. I know certain stats like BPM and VORP favor Pippen in a career sense, I'm just not sure that's enough to support the weight of the argument of Pippen being the better player, especially in their prime.

trelos6 wrote:Overall, my personal rankings say it isn’t close. Pippen with 6 weak MVP level seasons, Ewing with 3.


For example, we can look at MVP voting. This was actually the head scratching statement that prompted me to jump in.

MVP Voting
===========================

1988-89: Ewing (4th, 8 1st place votes)
1989-90: Ewing (5th, 1 1st place vote)
1990-91: Ewing (11th, 0 1st place votes)
1991-92: Ewing (5th, 0 1st place votes)
1992-93: Ewing (4th, 4 1st place votes)
1993-94: Ewing (5th, 1 1st place vote)
1994-95: Ewing (4th, 2 1st place votes)
1995-96: Ewing (N/A)
1996-97: Ewing (8th, 0 1st place votes)
1997-98: Ewing (N/A)


1988-89: Pippen (N/A)
1989-90: Pippen (N/A)
1990-91: Pippen (N/A)
1991-92: Pippen (9th, 1 1st place vote)
1992-93: Pippen (N/A)
1993-94: Pippen (3rd, 7 1st place votes)
1994-95: Pippen (7th, 1 1st place vote)
1995-96: Pippen (5th, 0 1st place votes)
1996-97: Pippen (11th, 0 1st place votes)
1997-98: Pippen (10th, 0 1st place votes)* (Pippen finished 10th in MVP voting, but only played 44 games this year)


Pippen had two top 5 MVP finishes (94, 96)
Ewing had six top 5 MVP finishes (89, 90, 92, 93, 94, 95)


Pippen received at least one 1st place vote in MVP Balloting in 3 years (92, 94, 95)
Ewing received at least one 1st place vote in MVP Balloting in 5 years (89, 90, 93, 94, 95)


Pippen received 9 total 1st place votes over his career
Ewing received 16 total 1st place votes over his career



I'm going to post Stockton's MVP votes here as well


Stockton
==================

1988: 10th, 0 1st place votes
1989: 7th, 0 1st place votes
1990: 9th, 0 1st place votes
1991: 12th, 0 1st place votes
1992: 12th, 0 1st place votes
1993: 10th, 0 1st place votes (received a single 3rd place vote - 1 point out of 980)
1994: 11th, 0 1st place votes (received a single 3rd place vote - 1 point out of 1010 points)
1995: 8th, 1 1st place vote
1996: 11th, 0 1st place votes
1997: 15th, 0 1st place votes
1998: 13th, 0 1st place votes
1999: N/A
2000: N/A
2001: 15th, 0 1st place votes (received a single 3rd place vote - 1 point out of 1240)

Stockton received 1 first place vote over his career.


Here's how they rank by MVP shares over their careers:

Ewing: 1.42
Pippen: 0.716
Stockton: 0.161


36 different players have won the MVP Award in NBA History. Ewing, despite never winning an MVP, is 36th in career MVP shares. I'm not sure how anyone can make a good faith argument that Pippen had more MVP level seasons than Ewing, much less twice as many. It seems like pretty much the opposite of what occurred in reality.


We can also look at RWOWY. I see someone posted the 5Y Ridge numbers for Pippen and Ewing already, but the Lasso and ENet sets have Ewing clearly ahead.

Ewing (RWOWY 5 Year Lasso)
===========
85-89: 59th
86-90: 70th
87-91: 67th
88-92: 40th
89-93: 12th
90-94: 1st
91-95: 9th
92-96: 8th
93-97: 6th
94-98: 13th
95-99: 39th
96-00: 41st
97-01: 72nd
98-02: 63rd

Pippen (RWOWY 5 Year Lasso)
==========
87-91: N/A
88-92: N/A
89-93: N/A
90-94: N/A
91-95: N/A
92-96: 72nd
93-97: 73rd
94-98: 18th
95-99: 19th
96-00: 13th
97-01: 53rd
98-02: 39th
99-03: 63rd
00-04: 70th


Ewing (RWOWY 5 Year ENet)
=================================

85-89: 52nd
86-90: 61st
87-91: 80th
88-92: 55th
89-93: 14th
90-94: 1st
91-95: 21st
92-96: 13th
93-97: 9th
94-98: 16th
95-99: 42nd
96-00: 44th
97-01: 68th
98-02: 67th


Pippen (RWOWY 5 Year ENet)
================================

87-91: N/A
88-92: N/A
89-93: N/A
90-94: N/A
91-95: N/A
92-96: 66th
93-97: 76th
94-98: 19th
95-99: 23rd
96-00: 19th
97-01: 41st
98-02: 39th
99-03: 61st
00-04: 65th
01-05: 62nd
02-06: 41st
03-07: 72nd

Pippen (and Stockton) over Ewing are a HARD sell for me. I just don't see it.
70sFan
RealGM
Posts: 29,761
And1: 25,082
Joined: Aug 11, 2015
 

Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #30 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 10/2/23) 

Post#22 » by 70sFan » Mon Oct 2, 2023 5:53 am

penbeast0 wrote:I'm not seeing Kawhi as this individually dominant guy who can carry a team. I see him as a great part of an ensemble group but his great defense and best offense were not at the same time and there's no point in his career where I thought of him as the league MVP. To be fair, others rate him higher and he's finished 2nd and 3rd in MVP votes in 16 and 17.

He still may be appropriate here in the category of a Walt Frazier though Frazier impressed me more.

Nominate: Reggie Miller -- consistent, outstanding playoff performer, longevity
Alternate: Artis Gilmore -- unlike Kawhi, I can't see prime Artis playing on a bad team, he was too good, even if used mainly as a defensive anchor as he was up to 74.

Kawhi was definitely in my mix of people to consider though.

What do you mean by the bolded? Artis played on bad teams for the majority of his NBA career.
Doctor MJ
Senior Mod
Senior Mod
Posts: 53,168
And1: 22,173
Joined: Mar 10, 2005
Location: Cali
     

Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #30 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 10/2/23) 

Post#23 » by Doctor MJ » Mon Oct 2, 2023 5:57 am

Induction Vote 1: Bob Pettit

Image

Alright so I've dug a bit more deeply into Pettit's data with the concerns I've seen people bring up - which I think are good to be brought up.

1. Pettit's data goes down in the playoffs. Some of it yes, but I think it's important to focus on prime when looking at averages. Pettit played 9 years in the playoffs, The 1st, 8th & 9th are disappointing statistically to varying degrees. He's got a middle 6 years year chunk where I think he looks quite solid. One can understandably scoff at me praising a mere 6 post-seasons, but aside from the fact that he did play more regular seasons than post-seasons, longevity is a different matter than prime.

2. As far as I can tell his RWOWY numbers that look good but not outlier are based on very little "without". So I think what's happening here is that because the team didn't get great right when he showed up, but did take a leap at another point with various new arrivals, he gets knocked form the start, and then limited as time goes by because the club go some nice new talent as Pettit aged out.

3. The two main guys with this - Cliff Hagan at the start and Zelmo Beaty at the end - were outstanding players who I think deserve strong consideration as Top 100 contenders, but I don't have any serious debate about which of these guys did the most for the Hawks.

4. With regards to the use of Pettit's big games to counteract his averages data, this resonates with me too, though I understand why some would be frustrated by this. I think part of the thing is that I don't see the Hawks as being a team that tended to disappoint in the playoffs. A guy can't make up for a bunch of upset losses in which he played bad by showing up big sometimes...but on the whole I don't really see Pettit as a guy who needs to "make up for" anything. He was the fulcrum of a very successful contending team for a long time, and sometimes he scaled to clearly dizzying heights.

5. It also matters specifically with regards to Hagan. If I felt like Hagan was the clear cut best player during the peak of their playoff success, that would absolutely hurt how I saw Pettit, but Pettit's performance in the finals just make me feel comfortable saying that.

Induction Vote 2: Walt Frazier

Clyde glides right in and knocks Pippen off my ballot.

Once again you can see me being a bit less concerned with longevity than many. I think what Frazier did in his prime is just considerably more of a two-way standout thing than you see if you look at his accolades and box score volume. An efficient volume scorer who is a star passer in a read & react system, and is more celebrated for his defense than his offense, while being the rock on which the closest thing to a dynasty in that era relied upon. It's a big deal to me.

Nomination Vote 1: Reggie Miller

Image

Reggie moves up a slot. What do I want to say in a nutshell?

He lead his team to comparable extended success to Ewing's Knicks and Stockton & Malone's Jazz with a knack for improving in the playoffs on a level that's very rarely seen.

He also happens to be one of the most important players in NBA history for his pioneering of the deep rover role (3-point movement shooter) which has now come to much greater prominence with Steph Curry. I'm not giving him credit for being a pioneer in my criteria here, but it's certainly part of the story that needs to be told, because it relates to why he was underrated in his own time.

The traditional box score paints Miller as "one dimensional", but we can now see that the constant action he took during possessions ensured he kept impacting the game all the way through a possession.

Nomination Vote 2: John Havlicek

So, I haven't been able to get Hondo off my mind. I think I'm guilty of letting my simplifying year-by-year ranking process influence me too much. The main point of comparison here is Scottie Pippen, who ended up scoring considerably higher than Havlicek in that study. Of course maybe the scoring itself is particularly wrong there, but realistically even if it isn't, I can't really say that I think it's clear that Pippen was better than Havlicek prime-per-prime. Pippen's got an argument, and Havlicek does too.

And then there is the longevity to consider. As I've said above, I believe I weigh longevity less than most here, but in particular comparisons it becomes hard to dismiss. Havlicek's career can be characterized as having his prime begin in a Pippen-like role, and then at around the time Pippen's injuries started really taking their roll, Havlicek up'ed his scoring primacy and arguably led a team to two championship.

Honestly, as I think about Havlicek more, he may jump some guys in the Nomination pool that I previously supported over him.
Getting ready for the RealGM 100 on the PC Board

Come join the WNBA Board if you're a fan!
User avatar
ZeppelinPage
Head Coach
Posts: 6,418
And1: 3,386
Joined: Jun 26, 2008
 

Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #30 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 10/2/23) 

Post#24 » by ZeppelinPage » Mon Oct 2, 2023 6:32 am

Vote: Patrick Ewing
Alternate Vote: Bob Pettit

Nomination: John Havlicek

Ewing and Pippen are neck and neck because of my emphasis on defensive play and the impact it has in the playoffs. Pettit's all-around abilities make this close and I'm going back and fourth between the two. I will defer and go with Pettit this time around but will think on it some more. Pettit's ability to score and rebound are immensely valuable to me. Ewing's valuable rebounding ability here might give him a slight edge for me. Total shame the Knicks were unable to acquire a better 2nd option than John Starks. In terms of overall impact to a basketball team, having the ability to rim protect and rebound at an elite level while being able to handle a heavy offensive load is immensely valuable. I rate guys like Nate Thurmond and Ben Wallace highly, so it makes sense that Ewing, who can provide offense with his ability to score and shoot from the mid range, is rated above them.

I put an emphasis on playoff performance and Havlicek is an 8x champion that consistently played better in the playoffs on heavier volume. He was a well-rounded player and he rarely ever missed games throughout his career. I think there are some other players being talked about here that one could certainly make an argument for but the level to which Havlicek one before and after Russell does show his value. I'm surprised to see mention of Havlicek as a "chucker" because I think that undersells what he was doing. The Celtics rarely had many players that could handle a high volume of shots so he was having to shoot because few others on the team would. Havlicek shooting takes pressure off his teammates and allows a defensively focused team to do what they do best. I could easily go another big here with how much I value what they bring, but Frazier does have the ability to score, pass, brings playoff resiliency, along with some of the best perimeter defense of his time.
f4p
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,694
And1: 1,725
Joined: Sep 19, 2021
 

Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #30 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 10/2/23) 

Post#25 » by f4p » Mon Oct 2, 2023 7:07 am

trex_8063 wrote:
f4p wrote:this is a weird part of the project. with hakeem in 6th and harden inside the top 30, my watch is ended, so to speak. at first glance, none of the nominees feel like they should be in the top 30, but at the same time, i'm at a loss for who should take their place. i suppose the mvp alphas are about the furthest i've ever really thought about actual specific rankings for players. i might think this guy or that guy belongs in the top 40 or the top 50, but actually putting a spot on it, i've never really gotten to that point.


Well, we [or at least I] will miss your participation.


sorry, i didn't mean i was quitting the project. i just meant my two biggest driving forces were off the board. and it has coincided with the end of any rankings i've ever done. which was mostly the MVP alphas, not because they're the only ones worth ranking, just that i've never put numbers next to anyone else's names. i have an opinion on west vs david robinson or kobe vs bird, but have never specifically tried to separate pippen from ewing or said anything more specific than "westbrook seems top 50". so it's just a no man's land at this point, but i will continue to participate. in some ways, it's nicer to have not have anything vested in the rankings. but in other ways, worrying about whether someone is 14th instead of 15th is kind of part of the fun.
OhayoKD
Head Coach
Posts: 6,042
And1: 3,930
Joined: Jun 22, 2022

Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #30 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 10/2/23) 

Post#26 » by OhayoKD » Mon Oct 2, 2023 7:45 am

Vote


1. Pippen


A. Skillset

-> excellent creator, even when we limit creation to passing:
While he was a phenomenal finisher and transition player, Pippen’s best offensive attribute was his passing. By my estimates, he dolled out “good” or “great” passes on about 3 plays per 100, which, for comparison, was slightly behind John Stockton’s rate.

-> unlike Stockton, he also broke defenses down as a penetrator with a legitimate scoring threat
-> unlike Stockton, led good offenses without the best offensive players of the 90's

Also unlike Stockton was arguably the best ever non-big defensively, coordinating teammates as a floor-general, making more plays on the perimeter than anyone, being the bulls primary help defender and also functioning as a co-primary paint protector:
Spoiler:
I did 40 possessions from the 4th game of the 91 ECF today just looking at the distribution of, as 70's calls it, "load as a paint-protector":
[url][/url]
(if you want to check, 20 possessions are finished through 19:42 amd 40 are finished through 49:52)

Note it was very hard to make out players(besides pippen whose got a nasty case of roblox head), so i could be misattributing here and there though I used jersey numbers, names, commentators, and head/body shapes the best i could. I also counted "splits" for both parties(which is why the numbers don't add up to 40)


Distribution went

Pippen/Grant
14 each

Purdue
6 or 7

Cartwright
4

Armstrong/Jordan
1 each

FWIW, Grant seemed more significantly more effective than Pippen but otoh, Pippen was trusted to deal with laimbeer far more than anyone else

All that aside, what's notable here is that it's the non-bigs who are checking rim threats the most. Not the centres. With one of the two deterring attempts, sometimes on an island, the rest of the team was enabled to try and force turnovers with suffocating pressure.

Chicago's defense was average before Pippen(and grant's) ascension in the second half of 1990. Their offense was good but not historic. At his apex, doing as much as he could, Jordan had done a commendable job(or at least most of the commendable job) turning a 27-win team into a 53-win one(full-strength ratings here), but it was the help that elevated the Bulls into a legitimate title threat in 1990 and then a dynasty for near the next decade with Pippen as the guy seeing the biggest jump in raw-production and the biggest jump in load/responsibility(on both ends).

He proceeded to lead a contender in 1994 in spite of intense internal conflict and the bulls stayed very good in 1995 despite the best and 3rd best players missing(with Scottie filing a trade request).

Notably the Bulls defense consistently elevated in the postseason, something which was not happening when it was just micheal/oakley/sam vincient. Using san's rolling srs, there were years where the defense outpaced the offense. Consider playoff scottie also saw a general "simple box" improvement, proceeded to lead the bulls to an elevated post-season outing in 1994, and then played a signficant role nearly knocking off the 67-win Lakers post-prime, and the notion Scottie wasn't also a playoff elevator seems detached from reality.

In fact, Pippen managed to anchor, by sans rolling ratings, the 7th and 22nd best playoff defenses ever in 96 and 98 respectively. He was arguably as close as any non-big has ever come to being a defensive superstar. And he was also someone who could lead good offenses in the absence of overwhelming talent. I think that combination demands induction sooner rather than later. Even if you pay no heed to the team-success, some of which came without Micheal. People speculate he lacked the intangibles of an alpha, but the results disagree.

Nomination
1. Draymond Green

I think he's legitimate superstar and should be afforded more respect. If the likes of hondo and manu are being considered, draymond shouldn't be too far:
Spoiler:
OhayoKD wrote:Career clearly favors Malone

Peak for Peak, Dray is much better in pretty much everything that isn't scoring.

-> much better passer,
-> much better defender,
-> much better ball-handler
-> top-tier iq which allows him to function as a floor-general on both ends

Scoring's a big deal, but historical and contemporary impact and team-success would suggest it's not nearly as big of a factor as people think it is. Of the GOAT or near-goat scorers, it's only the ones who also function as defensive anchors who actually have GOAT-tier lift even though preople presume the one who doesn't has a similar or better peak.

In pretty much every decade since the 60's(which were dominanted by a defense-only guy individually and collectively in a way no one else has ever dominated), a two-way big has looked about as or outright more valuable than everyone.

Malone is not even close to a top-tier offensive player, while Draymond is one of the best defenders ever in addition to various attributes that make him valuable on the other-end. As it so happen, Dryamond also looks like one of the most situationally valuable players of data-ball and scales up in the playoffs while Malone clearly scaled-down.

I think peak draymond vs peak malone is a perfectly reasonable debate in a vacuum. Granted PER would disagree.
No-more-rings wrote:If that “choosing to build around” for Green comes with Curry and Klay, I could see taking him. If you have to pick one in a vacuum it seems silly to take Draymond first.

what exactly are you looking at when you assume green needs to come with curry and klay to be better than karl malone. Absence of evidence =/ evidence of absence


OhayoKD wrote:
Owly wrote:
OhayoKD wrote:-> looks alot stronger in rapm and lineup-adjusted metrics

Granting that I'm very much not a RAPM expert
looking at ones I've got saved
97-14 looks awesome (4th rate behind LeBron, Duncan, O'Neal; 8th RAPM points above average ... add KG, Dirk, Bryant, Wade)
97-17 Manu's 5th (Curry's 6th, Draymond is 24th incomplete on Draymond but with a curve much more pro-Curry whilst still enough sample for Warriors to look strong ... in contrast to)
97-22 with Green 10th 6.6; Curry 11th 6.5; Manu 15th 6.0
Can't speak to other sources.

Here are the sourced databall-spanning sets I have numbers for both from

JE
Draymond -> 8.5
Manu -> 7.5

JE playoffs 1998-2019
Draymond -> 7.65, 4322 minutes
Manu -> 7.13, 6075 minutes


Cryptbeam(scaled single-year)
-> Draymond has the highest mark(+7 over nearly 6000 posessions) and 2 years in the top 250 with 5000+ possessions in both
-> Manu doesn't have a mark similar to dray's 2016, but shows up 6 times. Caveat, he does not cross 4500 possessions once and only crosses 4000 possesions thrice

Cheema 97-22
-> Manu, 131k poss, 4.3
-> Draymond, 110k poss, 4.25

Cheema 5-year
https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/ahmed.cheema8618/viz/FiveYearRAPMPeaks1997-2021/FiveYearRAPMPeaks1997-2021
Draymond's best 5-year mark clears and he has another 5-year mark similatly positioned to manu's best

Not sure how it looks in Ben's

Would say Draymond is advantaged over "prime/peak", but perhaps "strongly" was strong.
On the Green side ... RAPM is looking for the best solution in terms of credit/distribution/cause of impact. Warriors are really good ... this number has him ahead of Curry. I think the consensus here and everywhere is that he isn't as good as Curry. They play a lot together. This isn't to make the Draymond isn't very good, he's less important than Thompson etc case. But I think most will be curving down or just mentally regarding that number on Draymond with at least some amount of pessimism.

Yeah, I don't think this helps manu at all. I alluded to why in the stuff you snipped out but

-> Duncan clears Curry in JE, Cheema, Ben's scaled set, JE, and Cryptbeam over nearly any time frame, especially if we factor in possession-count
-> Duncan-Manu minute distribution in general and without the other is way more lopsided
-> Manu doesn't look very good when we take out rotations as a factor with wowy
-> Draymond looks very good when we take out rotations as a factor with wowy
-> Curry's numbers go up as draymond ascends, Duncan's do not seem to benefit from Manu

Being pessimistic on Manu is alot easier to empirically justify then Draymond. Most people should be favoring draymond if "is it really --them--" is the question.

Green's also still a bit behind Manu for career RS minutes and I would guess his later years are going to be weaker than thus far and so likely to pull big sample RAPMs down.

Sure, but Draymond looks better over similar time frames with more possessions played. Not looking to argue career value.
For those looking at that (this has been impact facing) Manu's box-side stuff might give him a boost (or greater certainty in impact, or greater confidence that an efficient creator for self and others has value everywhere) - which not to say Draymond's box is "bad".

Yeah, but 'box" isn't really real and can't hurt you. I can easily swing "box" to draymond just by counting different things:
-> progressive passes -> Draymond
-> progressive carries -> Draymond
-> chances created -> Draymond
-> touches -> draymond
-> shots deterred -> draymond
-> shots blocked -> draymond
-> pressures completed -> draymond
-> points scored -> manu

Shouldn't be too hard to compute something there that favors draymond and generally correlates with winning.

Comparing a defensive anchor who runs his team's offense and defense as a floor-general to a guy who scores more is going to naturally result in conventional box-aggregations favoring the latter. It's not a meaningful point.
Doctor MJ wrote:I'll tell you though that I think a critical recent juncture for me came with the identification of Dray's playoff impact to be more of an early round thing, while Ginobili's actually gets more impressive in the deeper rounds - and he led the Spurs in raw +/- in all 4 of the the Spur title runs he was a part of.

Very noisy stuff here. Not that you have to, but the first step to persuading me(and probably others) is explaining in basketball terms what manu ginobli was doing that turned him from seemingly not very impactful in the regular-season to potentially best perimiter player of the era if used right in the playoffs.


2. Westbrook, creation king, playoff impact all-timer, all-time elevator, and the most valuable piece of a team that took the 73-win warriors to 7 and thumped the 67-win 70-win srs spurs. Longetivity is the only knock at this level and even that is underplayed. Even as early as of 2013, a +9 srs team was getting matched/thumped by +3 srs non-contenders when he went out.

Also an all-time teammate/lockeroom quite literally setting okc for the future by endearing paul-george to a longer contract. Not even KD talks **** about westbrook. Leader of men and an all-time player in the most talented version of the league
User avatar
OldSchoolNoBull
General Manager
Posts: 9,069
And1: 4,460
Joined: Jun 27, 2003
Location: Ohio
 

Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #30 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 10/2/23) 

Post#27 » by OldSchoolNoBull » Mon Oct 2, 2023 7:56 am

Wow...Zeppelin's vote was big for Ewing. By my count, after Doc's vote but before Zeppelin's vote, it was Pettit 5, Ewing 2, Pippen 2, Stockton 2. A three-way tie for second place, a situation similar to the thread where Wade got in over Barkley and there was a mini-debate over how the votes were being counted in this scenario. Ewing has the most secondary votes of anyone in this thread, but if Ewing/Pippen/Stockton were in a tie, then the secondary votes for Ewing from Pippen and Stockton voters wouldn't have been counted, if I understand the rules correctly. But Zeppelin's vote for Ewing broke the tie, meaning Ewing's four secondary votes from Pippen/Stockton voters can be counted,

So Zeppelin's one vote for Ewing actually netted Ewing five votes, swing it from 5-2 Pettit to 7-5 Ewing.

In any event, this just got closer than it looked half an hour ago.

Vote: Bob Pettit

There is no clear separation between any of these five imo, but I believe he has the best era-relative case, given team success, longevity, and statistical consistency. Frazier has the team success, and you can argue he was the most important player on those teams, especially 73(and the 72 finals team) since Reed was in decline by then, but he doesn't have quite as many really good years as Pettit. Pippen has the team success, longevity, and some degree of statistical consistency for a good portion of his career, but he was always #2 on all of those championship teams.

Secondary Vote: Patrick Ewing

Frazier and Pippen both won more, but the thing that makes me lean Ewing here is that he simply carried a much bigger burden than those two. I could be wrong, but I think Frazier seen as part of an ensemble in the 70s, and Pippen was the clear #2. The entire Knicks franchise was on Ewing's shoulders for 15 years, under the microscope of the league's biggest and most brutal media market in an era where the media was much more advanced than it had been in the same market in Frazier's early 70s heydey. And you can say they never got the ring. But for me, what counts is this: In the ten years before Ewing arrived in New York, the Knicks missed the playoffs six times; in the ten years after Ewing left New York, the Knicks missed the playoffs eight times; in the fifteen years Ewing was in New York, they made the playoffs 13 times(the only two times they missed were Ewing's first two years), made the Finals twice, the ECF four times, and were maybe the single most defining NBA team of the 90s besides the Bulls. And that's with a certain amount of bad luck for Ewing - Charles Smith getting mugged in 1993, Starks going 2/18 in Game 7 in 1994, Reggie's 8 points in 9 seconds in 1995, the PJ Brown brawl in 1997, and breaking his own wrist in 1998.

I just think Ewing did the most with least here.

Nomination: Kawhi Leonard

Simply put, I think his is pretty easily the highest peak of those being considered. High-level two-way player, efficient scorer, elite rebounder for his position, won in multiple contexts.

Secondary Nomination: Reggie Miller

His consistency of scoring efficiency over his longevity wows me. Think others have a case - I'm thinking Havlicek - but I'll go with Reggie.

AND as I finish my post I see Ohayo's vote! His vote for Pippen after my vote ties Ewing/Pippen at 3, so that's two secondary votes for Ewing off the table, at least for the moment.

So Ewing was briefly up 7-5 after Zeppelin's vote, and then 7-6 after my vote, and now Pettit is up 6-5 after Ohayo's vote. Anyone's game.

(If I'm counting this wrong, please tell me.)
f4p
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,694
And1: 1,725
Joined: Sep 19, 2021
 

Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #30 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 10/2/23) 

Post#28 » by f4p » Mon Oct 2, 2023 9:44 am

penbeast0 wrote:I'm not seeing Kawhi as this individually dominant guy who can carry a team.


i mean he was literally the best player on a championship team. and unless you are talking injuries, then he played at that level, or possibly higher, in several other seasons. yes, the raptors had an elite overall defense, but kawhi dwarfs everyone else on the team individually in the playoffs.

PER
Kawhi 27.9
Siakam 17.2

WS48
Kawhi 0.249
Gasol 0.151

BPM
Kawhi 10.1
Gasol 3.4

He almost tops the next 3 combined in VORP. Also led the team in +/- at +16.7. if that's not carrying, then i don't know what is.

2019 is one of 14 playoff runs in history of at least 10 games where a player averaged 30 ppg and 60 TS%. and one of the other 13 is kawhi in 2021, with a disgusting 67.9 TS%. and that doesn't even include 2017, where he was at 27.7 ppg (and would be higher without zaza chopping off half a game) and another disgusting 67.2 TS%. and just for good measure, he was 34.5 ppg and 67.0 TS% in 2 games last season.


I see him as a great part of an ensemble group but his great defense and best offense were not at the same time and there's no point in his career where I thought of him as the league MVP. To be fair, others rate him higher and he's finished 2nd and 3rd in MVP votes in 16 and 17.


parts of ensembles don't put up the best playoff numbers in history. he's not chauncey or isiah here.

from 2016 to 2021, his playoff numbers are:
29.0 PER
62.9 TS%
0.263 WS48
10.9 BPM

those are basically MJ and lebron's career numbers. for their best 5 year statistical stretches in the playoffs:

1987-1991 jordan
30.6 PER
59.4 TS%
0.279 WS48
13.2 BPM

2009-13 lebron
29.1 PER
58.7 TS%
0.270 WS48
10.8 BPM

to be fair, those are also basically lebron's career averages because lebron 2011 and 2015 are perfectly spaced out to prevent lebron from having a singular crazy 5 year stretch. but that's the level kawhi is at when his various tendons and ligaments allow him on the court. he's one of the very best volume plus efficiency playoff scorers in history.

and if his very best offense and very best defense didn't overlap, the guy was still good enough at defense in 2019 to be put on the mvp and then the mvp sucked the rest of the series (yes, yes, muh raptors team defensive strategy) and that was smack dab in the middle of his (ongoing) offensive peak. if he was arguably the best perimeter defender ever at the same time he was giving you 30+ ppg on 65 TS%, then his peak would be considered like top 5.

He still may be appropriate here in the category of a Walt Frazier though Frazier impressed me more.


in the sense that kawhi basically can't complete a playoffs healthy (i still count 2017 since it was a cheapshot that could have befallen anybody), i can see putting frazier above him. but they aren't similar level players. healthy kawhi is this generations 2nd best player and a gimme top 15 all-time.

Nominate: Reggie Miller -- consistent, outstanding playoff performer, longevity
Alternate: Artis Gilmore -- unlike Kawhi, I can't see prime Artis playing on a bad team, he was too good, even if used mainly as a defensive anchor as he was up to 74.


hasn't kawhi kind of famously, up to the point it's used as a criticism, only played on good teams?
f4p
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,694
And1: 1,725
Joined: Sep 19, 2021
 

Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #30 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 10/2/23) 

Post#29 » by f4p » Mon Oct 2, 2023 10:21 am

Vote
1. Bob Pettit


Best era relative case left, by enough of a margin to account for the weaker era. 2 MVP's, 1 title, 2 scoring titles. 4 regular season PER titles, 2 postseason PER titles. Dominant championship game performance (if ewing goes 8/20 instead of 6/20 in game 6 in 1994, he might be a champion). Still pretty good all the way until year 11.

2. Patrick Ewing

Echoing OldSchoolNoBull, being the leader of a team in New York is a year in, year out pressure I don't see from Pippen or Stockton (especially being #2 in a small media market like Utah). Pippen basically dealt with it one year in Chicago and he quit on his team in a crucial playoff moment. Now multiply that by a decade and put it in New York, especially if Kukoc doesn't make the shot. Does Pippen thrive like he did behind the Jordan media shield? Ewing had enough of an offensive peak in 1990 to be genuinely impressive, concluding with a great playoff series win over Boston. Also anchored epic defenses in the mid-90's. Could have easily had a championship in better circumstances, though he obviously shares blame for failing in '94.

Nomination:
1. Kawhi Leonard - there will never be a "right" place to put Kawhi, with his injuries basically making him impossible to pin down. but a guy who would be well above many of the current inductees feels like he should go above guys who are starting to show up with no titles or as #2's on their teams.
OhayoKD
Head Coach
Posts: 6,042
And1: 3,930
Joined: Jun 22, 2022

Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #30 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 10/2/23) 

Post#30 » by OhayoKD » Mon Oct 2, 2023 10:38 am

healthy kawhi is this generations 2nd best player and a gimme top 15 all-time.

I too forgot steph exists
f4p wrote:
penbeast0 wrote:I'm not seeing Kawhi as this individually dominant guy who can carry a team.


i mean he was literally the best player on a championship team. and unless you are talking injuries, then he played at that level, or possibly higher, in several other seasons. yes, the raptors had an elite overall defense, but kawhi dwarfs everyone else on the team individually in the playoffs.

The raptors had one of the best defenses in nba history and still had that when Kawhi left. Kawhi "drawfing" everyone else on his team isn't really important if he has more help than everyone else he's playing. Distribution of help isn't what determines whether you carry or not.

And of course, evidence you've used to argue steph didn't carry works alot better with Kawhi.

I see him as a great part of an ensemble group but his great defense and best offense were not at the same time and there's no point in his career where I thought of him as the league MVP. To be fair, others rate him higher and he's finished 2nd and 3rd in MVP votes in 16 and 17.


parts of ensembles don't put up the best playoff numbers in history. he's not chauncey or isiah here.

The numbers which generated a...+2 playoff offense? Or does that sort of thing only matter with wardell

and if his very best offense and very best defense didn't overlap, the guy was still good enough at defense in 2019 to be put on the mvp and then the mvp sucked the rest of the series (yes, yes, muh raptors team defensive strategy) '

He was not "put on" giannis. Gasol was put on Giannis with the raptors employing a team defensive strategy where kawhi spent a marginally larger amount of possessions than siakim helping funnel the freak towards far and away the best defender on the team. Of course Giannis did not shoot much differently when the raptors swapped who started a possession on him(that includes lowry), which should be a big tell you are ascribing far too much credit to the not-big who would spend the next series left on draymond.

Of course when he swapped gasol out for an average big in zubac the clippers defense was outright bad in the following 2 playoffs, even though Kawhi's defensive tracking numbers and impact metrics all skyrocketed from 2019. The Raptors meanwhile were unaffected still posting one of the best defenses in history as they would prove to be a better rs and playoff team without Leonard than any non-kd team Steph has been without Steph. 

if he was arguably the best perimeter defender ever at the same time he was giving you 30+ ppg on 65 TS%, then his peak would be considered like top 5.
[/quote]
I don't think peak Kawhi has a particularly strong argument for best perimiter defender of his generation, never mind "all-time":
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=2258950
And of course his playmaking would really hit its stride in the next season where, on another team that was quite good without him(as good as the no-kd warriors), he...got decked by the soon to be gentleman swept nuggets in one of several series where the clippers defense was outright bad.

Unironically, one could probably argue the raptors were better that year despite your impression we were "carried" in 2019, A run which ended with steph outright outplaying him with weaker support.
f4p wrote: Pippen basically dealt with it one year in Chicago and he quit on his team in a crucial playoff moment

Is this the series where Pippen's underdog outscored Ewing's favorite culminating in a game 7 where Ewing was getting clamped until Scottie was subbed out at the end of quarter 3

I would say that series is a much better example of a guy being "put on" another than kawhi and giannis yeah
penbeast0
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Posts: 30,254
And1: 9,830
Joined: Aug 14, 2004
Location: South Florida
 

Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #30 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 10/2/23) 

Post#31 » by penbeast0 » Mon Oct 2, 2023 11:02 am

70sFan wrote:
penbeast0 wrote:I'm not seeing Kawhi as this individually dominant guy who can carry a team. I see him as a great part of an ensemble group but his great defense and best offense were not at the same time and there's no point in his career where I thought of him as the league MVP. To be fair, others rate him higher and he's finished 2nd and 3rd in MVP votes in 16 and 17.

He still may be appropriate here in the category of a Walt Frazier though Frazier impressed me more.

Nominate: Reggie Miller -- consistent, outstanding playoff performer, longevity
Alternate: Artis Gilmore -- unlike Kawhi, I can't see prime Artis playing on a bad team, he was too good, even if used mainly as a defensive anchor as he was up to 74.

Kawhi was definitely in my mix of people to consider though.

What do you mean by the bolded? Artis played on bad teams for the majority of his NBA career.


His prime was in the ABA, by the time he got to the NBA he had slowed down and they played him closer to the basket which lessened his defensive impact though it created some amazing high efficiency seasons.
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
70sFan
RealGM
Posts: 29,761
And1: 25,082
Joined: Aug 11, 2015
 

Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #30 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 10/2/23) 

Post#32 » by 70sFan » Mon Oct 2, 2023 11:15 am

penbeast0 wrote:
70sFan wrote:
penbeast0 wrote:I'm not seeing Kawhi as this individually dominant guy who can carry a team. I see him as a great part of an ensemble group but his great defense and best offense were not at the same time and there's no point in his career where I thought of him as the league MVP. To be fair, others rate him higher and he's finished 2nd and 3rd in MVP votes in 16 and 17.

He still may be appropriate here in the category of a Walt Frazier though Frazier impressed me more.

Nominate: Reggie Miller -- consistent, outstanding playoff performer, longevity
Alternate: Artis Gilmore -- unlike Kawhi, I can't see prime Artis playing on a bad team, he was too good, even if used mainly as a defensive anchor as he was up to 74.

Kawhi was definitely in my mix of people to consider though.

What do you mean by the bolded? Artis played on bad teams for the majority of his NBA career.


His prime was in the ABA, by the time he got to the NBA he had slowed down and they played him closer to the basket which lessened his defensive impact though it created some amazing high efficiency seasons.

I don't think that's reasonable to assume that Gilmore ended his prime at the age of 27. He was forced to adjust for the new league and new team, but based on the games we have I don't think we can say that he slowed down at all until 1979 injury.

From my tracking project, I think it's a true thing that Gilmore became less active on defensive end after 1977 (he still looks very good in 1977 playoffs). I don't think it's a matter of him slowing down, but simply his team being bad and him losing motivation. It's a limited sample, but from all games I have tracked from 1977/78 season, he had a few where he showed very little effort. I don't find any problem with his athleticism though and offensively he played the same way he did in 1975-76 period.

Again, I see no reason to believe that 1975 Gilmore would have done significantly better in 1979 Bulls team than the actual version. Maybe his defensive effort would be more consistent overall, but I think Gilmore was the type of player who could and did lose motivation without much support from his teammates (like most players in fact).
User avatar
LA Bird
Analyst
Posts: 3,596
And1: 3,355
Joined: Feb 16, 2015

Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #30 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 10/2/23) 

Post#33 » by LA Bird » Mon Oct 2, 2023 1:45 pm

Vote: Patrick Ewing
Nom: Reggie Miller


Both Ewing and Miller led some fairly strong teams on opposite ends of the floor in the 90s that unluckily only got better support towards the end of their prime. Ewing's best argument is probably the Knicks' GOAT-level rDRtg in 93/94. While coaching does play a factor along with some personnel upgrades (added Doc Rivers and Charles Smith via trade, both were on a -3.5 defense Clippers the year before plus Doc having some great WOWY numbers back in Atlanta already), Ewing was still the defensive anchor. He's a top 10 defensive GOAT and of the ones remaining in this project, he's clearly better than Mutombo, Thurmond, Wallace on offense (not so clear vs Howard, Mourning but that's another subject).

To be honest, I would have voted Stockton here if this project had a better vote counting system but as it stands, Ewing is my pick to go into the runoff because I have him above Pippen and Pettit (and Frazier who is last).

Also, moving the Pettit discussion over from last thread...

HeartBreakKid wrote:What advance stats are you talking about? He played in the 1950s, there are barely any available. Yes, his PER/WS went down - those aren't really all that valuable stats.

Unless you have more valuable stats available, WS is the best we have for that era. So if you are not going to use it, either you have better alternatives (do share) or you simply don't like what WS has to say about a player you like. Which is it?

His stats are still all-nba/MVP level in the post season. A career average of 51 TS% going down to 50 TS% is not a drastic difference, and 50 TS% is good for his era.

All-NBA/MVP level is a meaninglessly wide range which can describe any player in the top 50. If you want specifics, we can look at how Pettit's playoff stats stack up against Schayes or Hagan but people seem to be avoiding that comparison when I've brought up their names.

Also, I don't get how my one statement invoked so much aggression about what is seemingly irrelevant. Why is half of your giant paragraph about some random game Bob Pettit won? I never have mentioned that in my post nor my vote. PennBeast is the only guy who even mentioned that in this thread that I can recall.

You're ironically saying how one game made him seem so great, but you're the one harping on it.

Yeah, that giant paragraph of 7 lines :lol: . You are only trying to portray me as having some aggressive outburst because you can't address the actual arguments I have raised. G6 against Boston is not some random game. It's the entire basis for Pettit being better than Hagan in that championship run which in turn is the reason why Pettit's playoff dropoff is never criticized.

I would also argue that overvalueing PER is "ESPN level analysis" as PER is a commonly used stat among ESPN circles...

... and where in my post did I mention PER?

HeartBreakKid wrote:
falcolombardi wrote:So having only a slight drop off in the playoffs is virtually the same as not having any drop off


Yeah, exactly. When people say guys can't play in the playoffs it's talking about major drop offs, not slight dips. Slight dips do show that that player is resilient.

You mean a major drop off like this which I pointed out in my very first post about Pettit?
his WS/48 decline (0.213 -> 0.159) is the worst of any MVP-level player besides Malone and Embiid.
Doctor MJ
Senior Mod
Senior Mod
Posts: 53,168
And1: 22,173
Joined: Mar 10, 2005
Location: Cali
     

Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #30 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 10/2/23) 

Post#34 » by Doctor MJ » Mon Oct 2, 2023 2:19 pm

Induction Vote 1:

Ewing - 4 (AEnigma, falco, ZPage, LA Bird)
Pettit - 7 (Rishkar, HBK, Samurai, Clyde, Doc, OSNB, f4p)
Stockton - 2 (trex, beast)
Pippen - 3 (trelos, hcl, Ohayo)

No majority. Going to Vote 2 Pettit vs Ewing.

Ewing - 4 (trex, beast, trelos, hcl)
Pettit - 0 (none)
neither - 1 (Ohayo)

Ewing 8, Pettit 7.

Patrick Ewing is Inducted at #30.

Image
Nomination Vote 2:

Miller - 6 (AEnigma, beast, hcl, falco, Doc, LA Bird)
Kidd - 1 (Rishkar)
Baylor - 1 (trex)
Kawhi - 4 (HBK, trelos, OSNB, f4p)
Barry - 1 (Clyde)
Havlicek - 2 (Samurai, ZPage)
Green - 1 (Ohayo)

No majority. Going to Vote 2 Miller vs Kawhi.

Miller - 0 (none)
Kawhi - 0 (none)
neither - 6 (Rishkar, trex, Clyde, Samurai, ZPage, Ohayo)

Miller 6, Kawhi 4.

Reggie Miller is added to Nominee list.

Image
Getting ready for the RealGM 100 on the PC Board

Come join the WNBA Board if you're a fan!
f4p
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,694
And1: 1,725
Joined: Sep 19, 2021
 

Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #30 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 10/2/23) 

Post#35 » by f4p » Mon Oct 2, 2023 6:58 pm

OhayoKD wrote:
healthy kawhi is this generations 2nd best player and a gimme top 15 all-time.

I too forgot steph exists


healthy kawhi is churning out a decade of dominant playoff performances. and would be compared to a playoff faller in steph.
there's seems little to suggest that a decade plus of kawhi tearing up the playoffs wouldn't be considered better than steph. and of course healthy kawhi might have another title like 2021, where the clippers arguably looked like the best team in the league and kawhi looked like the best player in the playoffs.



f4p wrote:
penbeast0 wrote:I'm not seeing Kawhi as this individually dominant guy who can carry a team.


i mean he was literally the best player on a championship team. and unless you are talking injuries, then he played at that level, or possibly higher, in several other seasons. yes, the raptors had an elite overall defense, but kawhi dwarfs everyone else on the team individually in the playoffs.

The raptors had one of the best defenses in nba history and still had that when Kawhi left. Kawhi "drawfing" everyone else on his team isn't really important if he has more help than everyone else he's playing. Distribution of help isn't what determines whether you carry or not.


let's not argue over the word carry. penbeast's very next sentence said he considered kawhi part of an ensemble, from which i took "carry a team" to be the use of carry that would mean "lead a team to a championship" or being the obvious best player on a championship. because the next level up from "ensemble" isn't a 1994 hakeem carry job so it would be weird if penbeast really meant that he thought kawhi could be the best player on a championship team but just chose to word it as "anything below an all-time carry means you're part of an ensemble".


And of course, evidence you've used to argue steph didn't carry works alot better with Kawhi.


what is this a reference to? not sure what steph has to do with kawhi obviously being the best raptor.

I see him as a great part of an ensemble group but his great defense and best offense were not at the same time and there's no point in his career where I thought of him as the league MVP. To be fair, others rate him higher and he's finished 2nd and 3rd in MVP votes in 16 and 17.


parts of ensembles don't put up the best playoff numbers in history. he's not chauncey or isiah here.

The numbers which generated a...+2 playoff offense? Or does that sort of thing only matter with wardell


again, don't know what the curry thing means. not everything has to be some carry over from a previous thread.

and if his very best offense and very best defense didn't overlap, the guy was still good enough at defense in 2019 to be put on the mvp and then the mvp sucked the rest of the series (yes, yes, muh raptors team defensive strategy) '

He was not "put on" giannis. Gasol was put on Giannis with the raptors employing a team defensive strategy where kawhi spent a marginally larger amount of possessions than siakim helping funnel the freak towards far and away the best defender on the team. Of course Giannis did not shoot much differently when the raptors swapped who started a possession on him(that includes lowry), which should be a big tell you are ascribing far too much credit to the not-big who would spend the next series left on draymond.


kawhi wasn't guarding giannis much. giannis was putting up huge numbers, despite the existence of marc gasol. then kawhi guarded him a lot more and his numbers collapsed, with the continued existence of marc gasol. not sure why you are so adamant we never give kawhi credit for anything.

Of course when he swapped gasol out for an average big in zubac the clippers defense was outright bad in the following 2 playoffs, even though Kawhi's defensive tracking numbers and impact metrics all skyrocketed from 2019. The Raptors meanwhile were unaffected still posting one of the best defenses in history as they would prove to be a better rs and playoff team without Leonard than any non-kd team Steph has been without Steph. 


didn't the 2016 warriors in the playoffs go 4-2 with a pretty huge MOV without steph? and that's without counting a game where steph was +0 in something like 20 minutes, left with an injury, and the warriors were +29 without him. of course, we all know the raptors can win regular season games and 1st round series without kawhi. it's just that that after that, we start getting lebronto's instead of world champions.

if he was arguably the best perimeter defender ever at the same time he was giving you 30+ ppg on 65 TS%, then his peak would be considered like top 5.

I don't think peak Kawhi has a particularly strong argument for best perimiter defender of his generation, never mind "all-time":
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=2258950


apparently, it's manu :D. i'm using "perimeter defender" in the way i assume a lot would in terms of guarding people on the perimeter, not necessarily outdoing a sf/pf combo like lebron on overall defensive impact.


And of course his playmaking would really hit its stride in the next season where, on another team that was quite good without him(as good as the no-kd warriors), he...got decked by the soon to be gentleman swept nuggets in one of several series where the clippers defense was outright bad.


the 2020 clippers who went 8-7 without kawhi were as good as the pre-KD warriors? or do you mean the pre-KD warriors without steph? or the KD warriors when KD didn't play?

Unironically, one could probably argue the raptors were better that year despite your impression we were "carried" in 2019, A run which ended with steph outright outplaying him with weaker support.


"we"? you are a raptors fan? is that where the kawhi animosity comes from? because you seem really committed to the bit.
you'd think you'd be eternally grateful to go from one of the most embarrassing losses ever to champions the next season. also, not sure how steph "outright" outplayed kawhi. kawhi has slightly better box numbers despite steph's apparently weaker support presumably requiring him to do more, and whatever gravity steph has outside the box score would certainly be somewhat offset by kawhi having defensive value. and of course, kawhi's team won 4 of the 5 games KD didn't play in. it's hard to go from maybe a draw in the box score and losing 4-1 to "outright outplayed".


f4p wrote: Pippen basically dealt with it one year in Chicago and he quit on his team in a crucial playoff moment

Is this the series where Pippen's underdog outscored Ewing's favorite culminating in a game 7 where Ewing was getting clamped until Scottie was subbed out at the end of quarter 3

I would say that series is a much better example of a guy being "put on" another than kawhi and giannis yeah


it was a series where pippen did something that would get you roasted in the new york media until the cows came home if kukoc didn't happen to hit a remarkable shot while pippen sat on the bench. and then it would follow you around for 10 years every time something went wrong like any playoff failure followed ewing around. but pippen got it to be largely ignored because kukoc happened to make it and then got it even more ignored because he already had 3 titles with jordan and would get 3 more, so it's just a footnote. that's not how it works if you are carrying a franchise solo in the world's biggest media market without the world's most famous athlete basically sucking up all the media oxygen from you.
tsherkin
Forum Mod - Raptors
Forum Mod - Raptors
Posts: 91,765
And1: 31,367
Joined: Oct 14, 2003
 

Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #30 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 10/2/23) 

Post#36 » by tsherkin » Mon Oct 2, 2023 7:59 pm

OhayoKD wrote:The raptors had one of the best defenses in nba history and still had that when Kawhi left.


When was this? In 2019, we were 5th in the league and a -3.3 defense. A year later, we were at -5.6. Chicago alone has had 4 teams with better relative DRTG than that, since Jordan retired no less. Then in the playoffs, they managed:

vs ORL: 96.3 ORTG, -13.1 vs playoff average, -16.3 vs ORL regular season average
vs PHI: 105.1 ORTG, -4.3 vs playoff average, -7.5 vs PHI regular season average (the Embiid special)
vs MIL: 107.2 ORTG, -2.2 vs playoff average, -6.6 vs MIL regular season average (Giannis 58.3% FT, shot quite poorly)
vs GSW: 110.1 ORTG, +0.7 vs playoff average, -5.8 vs GSW regular season average (no Durant, missed Klay for a game)

I presume you're speaking of the playoffs, because "one of the best defenses in NBA history" does not accurately describe their RS play in 2019 or 2020. The opener against Orlando was one thing, but the other series weren't super dominant relative to postseason play, it seemed. And of course Philly had more to do with Embiid crapping himself than anything else, though obviously the defense through that playoff run was quite impressive. Was it really "one of the best defenses in NBA history," though?

Honest question, I don't track postseason defense enough to have a point of comparison.
OhayoKD
Head Coach
Posts: 6,042
And1: 3,930
Joined: Jun 22, 2022

Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #30 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 10/2/23) 

Post#37 » by OhayoKD » Tue Oct 3, 2023 12:49 am

tsherkin wrote:
OhayoKD wrote:The raptors had one of the best defenses in nba history and still had that when Kawhi left.


When was this? In 2019, we were 5th in the league and a -3.3 defense. A year later, we were at -5.6. Chicago alone has had 4 teams with better relative DRTG than that, since Jordan retired no less. Then in the playoffs, they managed:

vs ORL: 96.3 ORTG, -13.1 vs playoff average, -16.3 vs ORL regular season average
vs PHI: 105.1 ORTG, -4.3 vs playoff average, -7.5 vs PHI regular season average (the Embiid special)
vs MIL: 107.2 ORTG, -2.2 vs playoff average, -6.6 vs MIL regular season average (Giannis 58.3% FT, shot quite poorly)
vs GSW: 110.1 ORTG, +0.7 vs playoff average, -5.8 vs GSW regular season average (no Durant, missed Klay for a game)

I presume you're speaking of the playoffs, because "one of the best defenses in NBA history" does not accurately describe their RS play in 2019 or 2020. The opener against Orlando was one thing, but the other series weren't super dominant relative to postseason play, it seemed. And of course Philly had more to do with Embiid crapping himself than anything else, though obviously the defense through that playoff run was quite impressive. Was it really "one of the best defenses in NBA history," though?

Honest question, I don't track postseason defense enough to have a point of comparison.

I think the sixers series underrates them if anything. In 2019, the Sixers regular-season offensive rating is underrated due to not having their full team for a large part of the seaosn. Iirc they were a top 5 offense post-trade and both of their conference opponents stepped up statistically in the first round/two rounds relative to their playoff performance. Of course this is offset by the warriors missing durant.

That said, the 2019 Raptors rolling rating(which would factor in the warriors kd-less peformance up until that point to a degree) was -8.55, a bit below the flat rating of -9 ben said they had in his video.

The 2020 raptors were roughly a -6.6 defense going by flat defensive rating and a -12 by rolling in large part thanks to the celtics going +9 vs the sixers.

2020 Raptors were also 2-points better than the 2019 raptors in rs games with gasol fwiw
tsherkin
Forum Mod - Raptors
Forum Mod - Raptors
Posts: 91,765
And1: 31,367
Joined: Oct 14, 2003
 

Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #30 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 10/2/23) 

Post#38 » by tsherkin » Tue Oct 3, 2023 1:19 am

OhayoKD wrote:
tsherkin wrote:
OhayoKD wrote:The raptors had one of the best defenses in nba history and still had that when Kawhi left.


When was this? In 2019, we were 5th in the league and a -3.3 defense. A year later, we were at -5.6. Chicago alone has had 4 teams with better relative DRTG than that, since Jordan retired no less. Then in the playoffs, they managed:

vs ORL: 96.3 ORTG, -13.1 vs playoff average, -16.3 vs ORL regular season average
vs PHI: 105.1 ORTG, -4.3 vs playoff average, -7.5 vs PHI regular season average (the Embiid special)
vs MIL: 107.2 ORTG, -2.2 vs playoff average, -6.6 vs MIL regular season average (Giannis 58.3% FT, shot quite poorly)
vs GSW: 110.1 ORTG, +0.7 vs playoff average, -5.8 vs GSW regular season average (no Durant, missed Klay for a game)

I presume you're speaking of the playoffs, because "one of the best defenses in NBA history" does not accurately describe their RS play in 2019 or 2020. The opener against Orlando was one thing, but the other series weren't super dominant relative to postseason play, it seemed. And of course Philly had more to do with Embiid crapping himself than anything else, though obviously the defense through that playoff run was quite impressive. Was it really "one of the best defenses in NBA history," though?

Honest question, I don't track postseason defense enough to have a point of comparison.

I think the sixers series underrates them if anything. In 2019, the Sixers regular-season offensive rating is underrated due to not having their full team for a large part of the seaosn. Iirc they were a top 5 offense post-trade and both of their conference opponents stepped up statistically in the first round/two rounds relative to their playoff performance. Of course this is offset by the warriors missing durant.

That said, the 2019 Raptors rolling rating(which would factor in the warriors kd-less peformance up until that point to a degree) was -8.55, a bit below the flat rating of -9 ben said they had in his video.

The 2020 raptors were roughly a -6.6 defense going by flat defensive rating and a -12 by rolling in large part thanks to the celtics going +9 vs the sixers.

2020 Raptors were also 2-points better than the 2019 raptors in rs games with gasol fwiw


This is great info, so thanks for that. But Im still mjssing the "greatest defenses in NBA history" angle. How does that stack up?
OhayoKD
Head Coach
Posts: 6,042
And1: 3,930
Joined: Jun 22, 2022

Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #30 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 10/2/23) 

Post#39 » by OhayoKD » Tue Oct 3, 2023 2:45 am

tsherkin wrote:
OhayoKD wrote:
tsherkin wrote:
When was this? In 2019, we were 5th in the league and a -3.3 defense. A year later, we were at -5.6. Chicago alone has had 4 teams with better relative DRTG than that, since Jordan retired no less. Then in the playoffs, they managed:

vs ORL: 96.3 ORTG, -13.1 vs playoff average, -16.3 vs ORL regular season average
vs PHI: 105.1 ORTG, -4.3 vs playoff average, -7.5 vs PHI regular season average (the Embiid special)
vs MIL: 107.2 ORTG, -2.2 vs playoff average, -6.6 vs MIL regular season average (Giannis 58.3% FT, shot quite poorly)
vs GSW: 110.1 ORTG, +0.7 vs playoff average, -5.8 vs GSW regular season average (no Durant, missed Klay for a game)

I presume you're speaking of the playoffs, because "one of the best defenses in NBA history" does not accurately describe their RS play in 2019 or 2020. The opener against Orlando was one thing, but the other series weren't super dominant relative to postseason play, it seemed. And of course Philly had more to do with Embiid crapping himself than anything else, though obviously the defense through that playoff run was quite impressive. Was it really "one of the best defenses in NBA history," though?

Honest question, I don't track postseason defense enough to have a point of comparison.

I think the sixers series underrates them if anything. In 2019, the Sixers regular-season offensive rating is underrated due to not having their full team for a large part of the seaosn. Iirc they were a top 5 offense post-trade and both of their conference opponents stepped up statistically in the first round/two rounds relative to their playoff performance. Of course this is offset by the warriors missing durant.

That said, the 2019 Raptors rolling rating(which would factor in the warriors kd-less peformance up until that point to a degree) was -8.55, a bit below the flat rating of -9 ben said they had in his video.

The 2020 raptors were roughly a -6.6 defense going by flat defensive rating and a -12 by rolling in large part thanks to the celtics going +9 vs the sixers.

2020 Raptors were also 2-points better than the 2019 raptors in rs games with gasol fwiw


This is great info, so thanks for that. But Im still mjssing the "greatest defenses in NBA history" angle. How does that stack up?

Well by sans, the 2019 raptors were the 15th best playoff defense ever and the 2020 Raptors would rank higher using the same methodology.

I think the 2019 raptors might actually rank higher by flat, though they would rank lower for 2020 obviously
tsherkin
Forum Mod - Raptors
Forum Mod - Raptors
Posts: 91,765
And1: 31,367
Joined: Oct 14, 2003
 

Re: RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #30 (Deadline 5:00AM PST on 10/2/23) 

Post#40 » by tsherkin » Tue Oct 3, 2023 2:53 am

OhayoKD wrote:Well by sans, the 2019 raptors were the 15th best playoff defense ever and the 2020 Raptors would rank higher using the same methodology.

I think the 2019 raptors might actually rank higher by flat, though they would rank lower for 2020 obviously


Okay, interesting. Thanks.

Doctor MJ wrote:Induction Vote 1:

Ewing - 4 (AEnigma, falco, ZPage, LA Bird)
Pettit - 7 (Rishkar, HBK, Samurai, Clyde, Doc, OSNB, f4p)
Stockton - 2 (trex, beast)
Pippen - 3 (trelos, hcl, Ohayo)

No majority. Going to Vote 2 Pettit vs Ewing.


Does 7-4 not count as a majority? Interesting. That's nearly double the number of votes.

Return to Player Comparisons