Dominique wilkins vs Carmelo Anthony?

[conleyorbust]

For me it really depends on how you look at it.

Melo has a more refined skillset, similar size, he's athletic enough. I don't doubt that if he puts his mind to it he can be a more successful player. He's also just now the same age as Nique was when he entered the league so assuming that he isn't done developing he's probably on his way to having a better (at least statistically) career.

If the question is whether Melo is on Nique's level I'd say no. TrueLAfan explained that Nique led some successful teams (+50 wins) in a similarly competitive era, I wouldn't say his teamates were terrible but I'd easily take the pre-Iverson Nuggets over those team's supporting casts and I'd easily take the Iverson era Nuggets over those team's supporting casts. So team success helps out Nique a little but I guess its important to remember that Nique's Hawks weren't consistently successful so he wasn't a guy who could single handedly guarantee you 50 wins (then again neither is KG/Bron).

One main thing I looked at was PER rank. Nique was top 10 in PER 7 times in his career topping out at 5th 3 seperate times. I don't think Melo has been in the top 10 yet, although that will change at some point.

Nique also was percieved to be one of the best players (I think this is TrueLAfans' tool of choice) by MVP voters, coming in top 10 5 seperate times and topping out at 2 in 86'.

As far as statistical analysis of their individual games. In Nique's prime he was scoring a little more on at least equal efficiency, turning it over a bit less, and rebounding a bit more. His passing was a notch below Melo's and his defense a notch above.

Beyond the stats it just seems like Nique could impose his will on games a little better. At this point I don't think there is a valid argument that Melo is a better player than Nique was in his prime although you could certainly make a compelling argument that he will be a better player in a couple years provided he hasn't topped out (which could be the case).

[sp6r=underrated]

TrueLaFan debating tsherkin on basketball, is the equivalent of Lincoln/Douglas debating the merits of the expansion of slavery.

[_BBIB_]

Well, we

[tsherkin]

TrueLaFan debating tsherkin on basketball, is the equivalent of Lincoln/Douglas debating the merits of the expansion of slavery.

I'm so totally Lincoln...

[TrueLAfan]

Knew I

[blkout]

I think he'd get to the line a little more, sure, but he was still a high-volume chucker who was considerably less efficient than his contemporaries

He was hardly inefficient. He has a career TS% of .536, that number is only really brought down by the last three seasons of his career. At one point he got as high as .570.

Also, of all guards/forwards (in history) who've played over 500 games and averaged a career usage rate of 28% or more (Nique's was 30) Wilkins has the second lowest turnover % of all of them... the only one lower is Michael Jordan at 9.4% (to Nique's 9.. On that list, he also played the third most games out of all of them...

Code: Select all

Rk              Player   From   To  Tm  Lg    G    MP  Usg% TOV%
1       Michael Jordan 1985 2003 TOT NBA 1072 41013  33.3  9.4
2    Dominique Wilkins 1983 1999 TOT NBA 1074 38113  30.3  9.8
3         Vince Carter 1999 2008 TOT NBA  691 26091  30.1  9.8
4        Tracy McGrady 1998 2008 TOT NBA  743 26056  30.8 10.1
5        World B. Free 1976 1988 TOT NBA  886 26893  29.0 11.0
6        George Gervin 1973 1986 TOT TOT 1060 35597  29.6 11.7
7          Kobe Bryant 1997 2008 LAL NBA  859 31311  31.1 11.8
8         Mark Aguirre 1982 1994 TOT NBA  923 27730  29.1 11.9
9      Shaquille ONeal 1993 2008 TOT NBA 1036 37523  30.2 11.9
10       Allen Iverson 1997 2008 TOT NBA  822 34340  32.5 12.2
11         Karl Malone 1986 2004 TOT NBA 1476 54852  29.4 12.4
12          Tim Duncan 1998 2008 SAS NBA  817 30409  28.2 12.7
13           John Drew 1975 1985 TOT NBA  739 21828  30.8 12.8
14         Paul Pierce 1999 2008 BOS NBA  727 27366  28.8 13.0
15       Patrick Ewing 1986 2002 TOT NBA 1183 40594  28.0 13.7
16      Glenn Robinson 1995 2005 TOT NBA  688 25346  28.1 13.8
17       Pete Maravich 1971 1980 TOT NBA  658 24316  29.2 14.5

Also, of all forwards who have taken 20,000 shots or more for their career Wilkins ranks 4th (of eight) in TS%, and one of those above him is a PF...

Code: Select all

Rk              Player From   To  Tm  Lg    G    MP   TS%
1          Karl Malone 1986 2004 TOT NBA 1476 54852  .577
2        Julius Erving 1972 1987 TOT TOT 1243 45227  .558
3         Alex English 1977 1991 TOT NBA 1193 38063  .550
4    Dominique Wilkins 1983 1999 TOT NBA 1074 38113  .536
5           Rick Barry 1966 1980 TOT TOT 1020 38153  .525
6         Elgin Baylor 1959 1972 TOT NBA  846 33863  .494
7        John Havlicek 1963 1978 BOS NBA 1270 46471  .492
8          Elvin hayes 1969 1984 TOT NBA 1303 50000  .491

Note: Removing ABA/BAA records leaves Wilkins in 3rd and eliminates Erving and Barry.

I think you're selling the poor guy a bit short efficiency wise.

[_BBIB_]

Knew I

[TrueLAfan]

Well--I'm not going to go overboard about this but...Melo's teams have run into "monster teams"? Compared to what? Certainly not the Hawks of the 86-88, who were eliminated by

1986--Boston Celtics (Champions)
1987--Detroit Pistons (first year of the Bad Boys team; the Pistons were knocked out by the Celtics in 7 in the conference finals)
1988--Boston Celtics (one of the last, if not the last year of the great 80s Celtics teams)

Sure, the Nuggets were taken out by the Spurs once. In the first round. Because they haven't advanced past the first round in almost fifteen years. The Hawks got past the first round every year. (And keep in mind that two years ago, the Nugs were knocked out by the Clippers. Clippers vs. Bad Boys?) If you want to compare the Spurs and the Celtics--I'm good with that. The Spurs are a terrific team. The Mavs and Suns are great but flawed teams. This year...what, the Rockets and Jazz are monster teams? I'm really not feeling the monster team theory.

I'm not going to get into some big stink about why a player was second instead of fourth in MVP voting. It's ridiculous. It's missing the point. Dominique Wilkins was a top 5 player three times in MVP voting. (and was sixtgh once too.) There are between 20-25 people that have been in the top 5 four times. About ten others have been in three times. I understand why people might like Drexler better...but, at the very least, it's a very near thing. Unless everyone watching at the time missed out. I'm not gonna say that.

And, well, Mike Fratello is a very good coach. He's only a couple of hundred of wins behind Carmelo's coach, who has a markedly higher winning percentage in the regular season and playoffs and has been to the finals. Karl has been coach for almost four of Melo's five seasons; 70% of his games. They had that terrific run after he took over in Melo's rookie year which ended up in... a first round playoff loss. And after that, Karl's "consistency" led them to 44 and 45 wins compared to Bzedlik's 43 in Melo's rookie year. I'm not buying the coaching thing either. Injuries? Hey, I'll take the injury depleted Denver roster over the Hawks roster from 1986-88 any day of the week.

I like Carmelo fine. As conleyorbust said, I don't think there's any reason to believe Carmelo can't or won't do better than Dominique. I just don't think he's quite there yet.

[tsherkin]

Well--I'm not going to go overboard about this but...Melo's teams have run into "monster teams"? Compared to what? Certainly not the Hawks of the 86-88, who were eliminated by

I meant they had more competition against better teams in the regular season, I'm obviously not disputing the postseason elimination of Atlanta at the hands of the elite teams of the 80s, True, give me a LITTLE credit...

Sure, the Nuggets were taken out by the Spurs once.

Twice.

In the first round. Because they haven't advanced past the first round in almost fifteen years. The Hawks got past the first round every year.

Not true. They got washed out in the first round in 'Nique's first two years, then missed the playoffs, THEN made three consecutive second-round washout appearances, then lost in the first round, then missed the playoffs, then washed out in the first round, then missed the playoffs, then washed out in the first round.

One of the other problems with your comparison is that you're discussing 'Nique's 4th to 6th years as a 26, 27 and 28 year-old compared to Carmelo's 5th year as a 23 year-old.

'Nique had a three-year collegiate career at Georgia to help polish his game and was older, in his prime. That's part of why your comparison is bunk from the start, but even forgetting that it undermines the basis of comparison, 'Melo still stacks up well with 'Nique's peak... which isn't favorable to Wilkins.

I'm not going to get into some big stink about why a player was second instead of fourth in MVP voting. It's ridiculous. It's missing the point. Dominique Wilkins was a top 5 player three times in MVP voting. (and was sixtgh once too.)

I contest the validity of those selections, personally. I have never watched a season in which Dominque Wilkins played and been swayed enough to believe he was a top-5 player. And I've watched ball since his 6th or 7th year in the league, right smack in the middle of his prime.

And, well, Mike Fratello is a very good coach. He's only a couple of hundred of wins behind Carmelo's coach, who has a markedly higher winning percentage in the regular season and playoffs and has been to the finals.

Yeah but he also enjoyed Gary Payton and Shawn Kemp on the same team for a long time and a host of other very talented roleplayers besides (such as Detlef Schrempf, Nate McMillan, etc). Karl's offense is pathetic and he is a weak defensive coach.

Karl has been coach for almost four of Melo's five seasons; 70% of his games. They had that terrific run after he took over in Melo's rookie year which ended up in... a first round playoff loss.

Ah, no? Karl took over in Melo's second season. It ended with a 32-8 run to the playoffs and a loss to the eventual-champion San Antonio Spurs.

And after that, Karl's "consistency" led them to 44 and 45 wins compared to Bzedlik's 43 in Melo's rookie year. I'm not buying the coaching thing either. Injuries? Hey, I'll take the injury depleted Denver roster over the Hawks roster from 1986-88 any day of the week.

Injuries riddled the team at the moments they needed to compete, such as the playoffs. The absence of Kenyon Martin hurt them quite a bit, as have annual injuries to Nene and Camby (though not Camby this and last season). The Nuggets' roster pre-Iverson and including injuries is not superior to the Hawks roster.

I like Carmelo fine. As conleyorbust said, I don't think there's any reason to believe Carmelo can't or won't do better than Dominique. I just don't think he's quite there yet.

And I'm inclined to disagree... passionately.

[_BBIB_]

Melo's first step is flat out nasty, and he's extremely strongly built, runs the floor with ease....

I'll take that with a 34 inch vertical over someone who leaps through the roof and lacks in the other spots.
.

Nique is a top 50 player of all-time.

Anyone who thinks he was just a dunker never watched any film outside a highlight reel.

Nique only dunked a couple times per game.

[NO-KG-AI]

-= original quote snipped =-




Nique is a top 50 player of all-time.

Anyone who thinks he was just a dunker never watched any film outside a highlight reel.

Nique only dunked a couple times per game.

Because I mentioned Domonique, and I said all of that about him in my post.

[Warspite]

1. Why does tsherkin keep useing the age argument as an excuse? The OP said nothing about who you would draft or at a ceratin age.

The question simply is that if your picking teams on the playground or signing a FA for your NBA team and these 2 are available who do you take???

tsherkin useing the simple argument that he takes Melo because he values his style of play is a very valid argument. However he has done nothing of the sort. Im more inclined to believe that some big kid in a Hawks jersey took his lunch money when he was younger.

I take Nique for my team

1. Sell more merchandise
2. Nique is in his prime
3. better defender

The questions I have about Nique are this

1. Can he (playing in todays rules) play w/o the ball more and play better team defense?
2. Can I get a high post bigman to play with him?
3. Can he/team still be successful with a 25% 3pt shooter at SF?

Can Nique adapt to todays game?? Nique was never told to share the ball or to pass by Fratello. Fratello said in an interview that he prefered Nique take a shot against a double team vs him passing to an open teammate to take a long range jumpshot.

The differance between tsherkin and myself is that
1. I ask could he do it in the right enviroment
2. tsherkin says he didnt so he cant.

tsherkin looks at a players stats and judges a players ability. He believes that the circumstances and the enviroment have bareing on the results. I refuse to accept that.

I played on the same team 2 yrs in a row. One yr I was asked to be the scorer and the other to be the PG. If you look at my 28.6ppg on 40% FG and an ast/TO ratio of less than .5 you could say theres no way I could play PG. Im a chucking SG with bad handles and couldnt find a open man if all 5 guys were guarding me. You could believe that but you would be wrong. I could play PG but Magic nor Nash nor Kidd could get assts on a team with 8 players who never played orgainsied basketball before and a team in which the 6th man (a 13yr old) had never hit a 3pt basket in his life in a league with former Div1,2, and Mc Donalds All American players in it.

Again I understand an argument that Melo would fit your team or team style better than Nique. I simply dont get an argument that Melo has already accomplished more or that Melo today is better than Nique ever was.

Im just waiting for tsherkin to use the evolution theory that players are just better today.

[TrueLAfan]

-= original quote snipped =-

One of the other problems with your comparison is that you're discussing 'Nique's 4th to 6th years as a 26, 27 and 28 year-old compared to Carmelo's 5th year as a 23 year-old.

'Nique had a three-year collegiate career at Georgia to help polish his game and was older, in his prime. That's part of why your comparison is bunk from the start, but even forgetting that it undermines the basis of comparison, 'Melo still stacks up well with 'Nique's peak... which isn't favorable to Wilkins.

I think you've got it backwards here. This goes back to the crux of our disagreement. Is Carmelo as good now as Nique ever was? If you start talking about Nique's advantages in going to school and having more play, you're moving into the "He's certainly got (at least) a reasonable shot to be at Nique's level later in his career." And, as I--and others--have said, I'm good with that. But as good right now as Nique ever was? That's what we're talking about...and that makes the questions regarding college experience or being 23 vs. being 28, or 4th vs. 8th year completely irrelevant. 'Melo "stack(s) up well" except he is not quite as successful in the W column, in the playoffs, with all-league/MVP voters, or statistically. So we're back to "he's not as good now but could be better later." And, like I said, I'm fine with that...but it points to the idea that Carmelo Anthony is not as good now as Dominique Wilkins was at his peak. He may get there; he might not get there. But, in terms of the OP, I'd go with Dominique. A bird in the hand and all that.

I was looking at Melo's last three years (under Karl) to Nique's 1986-88 for a few reasons. They're among the best of Nique's seasons. (This benefits 'Melo in the respect that Nique had 9-10 peak level seasons.) Nique did the most with the least in those years. Those are also Melo's best years. He's had coaching "stability." And in those three years...which includes this year...the Nuggets have been beaten by the Clippers and the Spurs. And taking over 40 games into the second season of someone who's played five full seasons means they've coached the player for....three and a half of five seasons. Count playoff games, and it's a higher percentage. It's closer to four than three seasons.

And it seems we're devolving into excuses. Karl is a "weak" coach? What--compared to Fratello? Your point was that Dominique had some sort of coaching great with him in his formative years--and I'll compare Fratello and Karl as coaches any day. And I've got kind of a deal breaker here. Karl is coaching right now. The Czar isn't. I'm just not going to buy into the idea that Karl is a lousy coach that teams keep employing while Fratello is a better coach that is essentially the same age who gets employed less, wins less, goes to the playoffs less, and wins in the playoffs less. It's completely counterintuitive. It's saying that everybody involved in basketball is wrong and you and/or me is right.

Which also goes to MVP voting. "Contesting the validity of MVP selections" over a long period means that you're looking at a whole lot of people for a whole lot of time--close to a decade in this case--and saying they got it pretty far wrong. That's a big chunk to bite off. And I'm not really seeing why. Scoring is advantaged? Well, MVP candidates often score more than 20 a game... but I looked into the voting from 1986-93 when Nique did his best, I discovered something surprising. Scoring isn't valued as much you think it might be. 23 of the 80 players that made the top 10 MVP voting in that period scored 20-24 a game. 14 of them scored less than 20 a game. Essentially, half the top 10 scored less than 24 a game. 24 a game is plenty, sure...but it's not extreme or anything. Clearly, high scoring isn't an end-all, be-all ticket to success in MVP voting. And, to cap it off, being one of the top 5 scorers in the league isn't a ticket to MVP votes either...looks like about 30% of the scorers in the top 5 during those years didn't make it to the top 10 in MVP voting. When you take Jordan out of that, it goes to something like 40 percent. So I pretty much reject the "scoring = success in MVP voting" idea too. Dominique Wilkins was clearly doing something valuable out there besides scoring that was recognized.

In a way, Dominique Wilkins is like the hot girl (or guy) who is actually pretty smart. Not the smartest, mind you, but smart. Works hard all the time, doesn't take days off. Follows orders. Is in charge of projects that are successful and ends getting promoted and getting serious recognition for his/her peers. There's a tendency to look at a person like that and say, "Well, it's because of how he/she looks." But that's missing the big picture; the project success speaks for itself. Dominique played 93% of his teams games and took them to the playoffs in 8 of his first 11 seasons. The team won over 55% of their games and had 4 50 win seasons in that span (and that's not giving any credit for the year Nique was traded...the Hawks were 34 and 15 when he was traded). When Carmelo is doing stuff like that--and he's close, but no cigar--then we have the conversation. Hey, maybe he's starting to do it now. If the Nuggets go 4-3, they'll be tied for the third best season that Nique's Hawks had (well, fourth best if you count 1993-4). But, again, that goes to what he will or might do, not what he has done.

[penbeast0]

Not to argue too much with you but if 70% of the top scoeres in the league end up in the top 10 MVP vote, no matter how piss poor their shot percentage/defense/attitude/etc., that rates volume scoring higher than I'd rate it. And yeah, I believe large numbers of people are wrong on a lot of things pretty consistently and have prejudices in certain directions. This happens to be one area that I think the correlation between top scorers and top 10 MVP finishes is a lot higher than between top scorers and championship teams.

[TrueLAfan]

Not to argue too much with you but if 70% of the top scoeres in the league end up in the top 10 MVP vote, no matter how piss poor their shot percentage/defense/attitude/etc., that rates volume scoring higher than I'd rate it. And yeah, I believe large numbers of people are wrong on a lot of things pretty consistently and have prejudices in certain directions. This happens to be one area that I think the correlation between top scorers and top 10 MVP finishes is a lot higher than between top scorers and championship teams.

Oh, jeez. This is getting ridiculous.

Look, there are obviously a lot of things that are important in addition to scoring. But we're going completely nuts if we don't acknoweldge that the majority of great scorers are great players. To give you an idea of this, since 1980, here is the list of players that have been in the top 5 of scoring at least 4 times

Karl Malone--13
Michael Jordan--11
Shaquille O'Neal--9
Allan Iverson--7
Kobe Bryant--6
Dominique Wilkins--6
Alex English--6
Hakeem Olajuwon--4
Larry Bird--4
Moses Malone--4
Adrian Dantley--4
George Gervin--4

We're leaving out the 20-25 combined seasons by guys like LeBron, Robinson, Barkley, Dr. J, Drexler, etc. That's well over 70% of the seasons of the the top 5 scorers. Top scorers tend to be great players. Over half the teams in the finals in the top 25 years have had a top 5 scorer. Look at that list...Jordan, Shaq, Kobe, Hakeem, Bird. That's a lot of titles.

Of course, you look at the list and say, "Well, Alex English is ahead of Hakeem--that's crazy!" It is. Alex English was a better scorer. He was a really good player, but not nearly as good as Hakeem. MVP voters caught that. Adrian Dantley? Great on paper; not so much on the court. Voters caught that too. Guys like Kiki Vandeweghe, Purvis Short, Michael Redd, Antoine Walker--they have big scoring seasons and don't get a whiff of the MVP top 10. MVP voting does a very good job acknowledging value--and scoring is a big part of that. But it's not the whole enchilada--and the voting reflects that. It reflects it pretty damn well, in fact. Otherwise, guys like Ben Wallace and Jack Sikma and Dennis Rodman and Fat Lever and Chauncey Billups and Jason Kidd wouldn't ever get into the top 10...and they do.

[tsherkin]

1. Why does tsherkin keep useing the age argument as an excuse? The OP said nothing about who you would draft or at a ceratin age.

It came up because TrueLA is using certain years from 'Nique's career and comparing them against 'Melo's earlier years.

Im more inclined to believe that some big kid in a Hawks jersey took his lunch money when he was younger.

This is just stupid.

I take Nique for my team

3. better defender

This isn't factually accurate.

The differance between tsherkin and myself is that
1. I ask could he do it in the right enviroment
2. tsherkin says he didnt so he cant.

That's not factually accurate, I said nothing of the kind. I'm looking at what he did, since that's all there is. I suspect he'd improve his overall FTA/FGA rate but would take fewer shots per game, so the ultimate result is that it would even out.

tsherkin looks at a players stats and judges a players ability. He believes that the circumstances and the enviroment have bareing on the results. I refuse to accept that.

Did you just say that you don't believe circumstances and environment have bearing on results???

Im just waiting for tsherkin to use the evolution theory that players are just better today.

This is wildly ridiculous...

[NO-KG-AI]

What's funny is the evolution theory comment, for a player from the 80s-90s, when you've said many times on the board, Magic is your favorite player of all time

[Hood President]

Wilkins IMO gets no respect by anybody. If you dont believe me, people are actually picking melo over nique. if you picked melo than you clearly dumb as hell(yes i said it). and you clearly dont know basketball.

nique= underrated