RealGM 2017 Top 100 #82 (James Worthy)

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

trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,573
And1: 8,207
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

RealGM 2017 Top 100 #82 (James Worthy) 

Post#1 » by trex_8063 » Thu Jan 18, 2018 3:39 pm

1. Michael Jordan
2. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
3. Lebron James
4. Bill Russell
5. Tim Duncan
6. Wilt Chamberlain
7. Magic Johnson
8. Shaquille O'Neal
9. Hakeem Olajuwon
10. Larry Bird
11. Kobe Bryant
12. Kevin Garnett
13. Oscar Robertson
14. Karl Malone
15. Jerry West
16. Julius Erving
17. Dirk Nowitzki
18. David Robinson
19. Charles Barkley
20. Moses Malone
21. John Stockton
22. Dwyane Wade
23. Chris Paul
24. Bob Pettit
25. George Mikan
26. Steve Nash
27. Patrick Ewing
28. Kevin Durant
29. Stephen Curry
30. Scottie Pippen
31. John Havlicek
32. Elgin Baylor
33. Clyde Drexler
34. Rick Barry
35. Gary Payton
36. Artis Gilmore
37. Jason Kidd
38. Walt Frazier
39. Isiah Thomas
40. Kevin McHale
41. George Gervin
42. Reggie Miller
43. Paul Pierce
44. Dwight Howard
45. Dolph Schayes
46. Bob Cousy
47. Ray Allen
48. Pau Gasol
49. Wes Unseld
50. Robert Parish
51. Russell Westbrook
52. Alonzo Mourning
53. Dikembe Mutombo
54. Manu Ginobili
55. Chauncey Billups
56. Willis Reed
57. Bob Lanier
58. Allen Iverson
59. Adrian Dantley
60. Dave Cowens
61. Elvin Hayes
62. Dominique Wilkins
63. Vince Carter
64. Alex English
65. Tracy McGrady
66. James Harden
67. Nate Thurmond
68. Sam Jones
69. Kevin Johnson
70. Bob McAdoo
71. Sidney Moncrief
72. Paul Arizin
73. Grant Hill
74. Bobby Jones
75. Chris Bosh
76. Tony Parker
77. Shawn Marion
78. Hal Greer
79. Ben Wallace
80. Dan Issel
81. Larry Nance
82. ???

Please begin....

Spoiler:
Ainosterhaspie wrote:.

eminence wrote:.

penbeast0 wrote:.

Owly wrote:.

Clyde Frazier wrote:.

PaulieWal wrote:.

Colbinii wrote:.

Texas Chuck wrote:.

drza wrote:.

Dr Spaceman wrote:.

fpliii wrote:.

euroleague wrote:.

pandrade83 wrote:.

Hornet Mania wrote:.

Eddy_JukeZ wrote:.

SactoKingsFan wrote:.

Blackmill wrote:.

JordansBulls wrote:.

RSCS3_ wrote:.

BasketballFan7 wrote:.

micahclay wrote:.

ardee wrote:.

RCM88x wrote:.

Tesla wrote:.

Joao Saraiva wrote:.

LA Bird wrote:.

MyUniBroDavis wrote:.

kayess wrote:.

2klegend wrote:.

MisterHibachi wrote:.

70sFan wrote:.

mischievous wrote:.

Doctor MJ wrote:.

Dr Positivity wrote:.

Jaivl wrote:.

Bad Gatorade wrote:.

Moonbeam wrote:.

Cyrusman122000 wrote:.

Winsome Gerbil wrote:.

Narigo wrote:.

wojoaderge wrote:.

TrueLAfan wrote:.

90sAllDecade wrote:.

Outside wrote:.

scabbarista wrote:.

janmagn wrote:.

Arman_tanzarian wrote:.

oldschooled wrote:.

Pablo Novi wrote:.

john248 wrote:.

mdonnelly1989 wrote:.

Senior wrote:.

twolves97 wrote:.

CodeBreaker wrote:.

JoeMalburg wrote:.

dhsilv2 wrote:.
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,573
And1: 8,207
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 #82 

Post#2 » by trex_8063 » Thu Jan 18, 2018 3:44 pm

1st vote: James Worthy
Some may argue Worthy hit the lottery in landing on the Lakers at that time; and some also suggest his scoring capability is inflated by playing with Magic. But consider a couple things:
*I recall an analysis that indicated his scoring and efficiency in games Magic missed during his prime basically didn't skip a beat. There were always scorers on those Laker teams: Kareem could score and wanted his touches, Magic could score, and there was usually at least one other pretty good scorer (Byron Scott or maybe Norm Nixon); so Worthy always had to share the ball, which perhaps limited his volume compared to what he may have received elsewhere. Looking at Worthy's offensive game (one of the great transition running/finishing forwards, could also demolish his man in single-coverage from the elbow, decent post game, and not a bad mid-range shooter), it's not hard to imagine prime Worthy dropping 22-24 ppg on respectable (~55% or so) TS in a "lesser" scenario. Worthy was a legit scorer.
**Worthy [to my knowledge] never griped about having to share the spotlight, share the touches, and generally be perceived as a the 2nd or even 3rd banana on the team. In interviews I've heard, he seems an intelligent and well-spoken man, and I've never read a word of dissent attributed to teammates or coaches. This is counter to some of the issues we've been discussing wrt other players. Worthy seems a true team player.

Few other nuts and bolts (both good and bad):
*My primary criticisms of him are that he was a mediocre (to slightly weak) rebounding SF/combo forward, and his longevity is only so-so. Not bad on the latter: 12 seasons, 11 of which he was at least a useful role player, and very durable, too (>30,000 rs minutes logged in those 12 years), and a 7-8 year prime......just not exceptional either.
**Solid/decent defender, probably versatile enough to guard either the 4 or 3 position.
***Excellent turnover economy.


2nd vote: Dennis Rodman
Have tentatively decided on Dennis for my secondary vote. Always an energy guy, which I admit I have a soft spot for. He came into the league as a "useful" bench player, was arguably in his prime (very near to it, anyway) by his 2nd season. Played nearly 14 seasons, and basically 11 of them are at least very near prime-level: from '88 to '98 he was on average a 14.8 PER, .154 WS/48, and +3.3 BPM player in 33.3 mpg........which we know isn't fully capturing his full defensive value some years.
He was an energetic, versatile defender and EXCELLENT rebounding combo forward right off the bat in his career, eventually becoming a DPOY (twice), before then allowing his defense to regress somewhat (still a solid post defender in Chicago) as he carved out a new niche as basically the GOAT rebounder. During the latter half of his career, I actually suspect he was more valuable on the offensive end than the defensive, as result of the fairly ridiculous ~6 OREB/game he was averaging. RAPM for '97 and '98 reflects this.

I've criticized Rodman previously for his volatile temperament and his propensity for team-cancer meltdowns (see '95 WCF), and I think it's true you need some strong (and vocal) team leaders to keep him in line. It's for this reason that I haven't supported him earlier (and in truth, I could be convinced that this is important enough a consideration that I should delay my support for him a few spots further, in favor of someone like Kawhi or Big Game James).

However, a few "intangible" things I'll credit him with to counter the negative repercussions of his erratic behavior......the positive repercussions of his erratic behavior:
1) No one could get under the skin of opposing players like Dennis Rodman. They don't call him "The Worm" for nothing. Rodman had a knack for getting in opponents' heads, sometimes taking people out of their game (see Brickowski in the '96 Finals). That's a semi-tangible value his team can continue to reap the rewards for even after Rodman takes a seat on the bench.
2) No one played the crowd like Dennis Rodman. Home-team fans LOVED him; opposing fans hated him. But he could really get the crowd going, and sometimes that fuels a team. Get the home-crowd going, the home-team can sometimes ride that momentum. And on the road, well.....Rodman didn't have a problem playing the villain (which perhaps deflects the wrath away from his teammates or the actual course of the game, and instead fixates them directly on him???).
3) The hustle plays. We you see a guy lay it all out diving in futility for a loose ball or some such, I kinda feel like [as a teammate] it makes it that much harder for you to slack off at all.......because you're just going to look bad by comparison if you do.

Anyway, Rodman's got all the other resume-filler that has been stated by another poster below, so I won't get into that. Not 100% set on him here, but tentatively will side with him. Could potentially be swayed to Melo, Webber, Brand, Kawhi, or Sheed (swaying me, tbh, possibly hinges more on convincing me of the extent of risk/danger/destructive potential you get with Dennis Rodman than on building the other candidates up).
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
User avatar
Clyde Frazier
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 20,222
And1: 26,100
Joined: Sep 07, 2010

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 #82 

Post#3 » by Clyde Frazier » Thu Jan 18, 2018 4:08 pm

Vote 1 - Carmelo Anthony

Vote 2 - Tiny Archibald

- 14 seasons
- 6x all NBA (two 2nd, four 3rd)
- 1 top 3 and 1 top 10 MVP finish
- 1x scoring champ

Adding some new info right off the bat…

Players already voted in in Melo’s VORP and Win Shares range:

VORP

George Gervin 32.2 *-1 season
Bobby Jones 32
Dan Issel 31.2 *-3 seasons
Steve Nash 31.2
Carmelo Anthony 29.4
Kevin Johnson 28
Chris Bosh 27.5
Tony Parker 27
Bob McAdoo 26.5 *-1 season
Dave Cowens 26.2 *-3 seasons
Alonzo Mourning 24

*Number of seasons played prior to 73-74 where stat could not be calculated

Win Shares

In this case the total # of win shares speaks to Carmelo’s solid longevity. As a reference point, his prime WS/48 from 06-14 is .149 and he peaked at .184.

Hal Greer 102.7
Alex English 100.7
Grant Hilll 99.9
Allen Iverson 99
McGrady 97.3
Carmelo Anthony 97
Bobby Jones 94.1
Ben Wallace 93.5
Kevin Johnson 92.8
Sam Jones 92.3
Bob Cousy 91.1
James Harden 91.3
Sidney Moncrief 90.3
Alonzo Mourning 89.7
Bob McAdoo 89.1
Dave Cowens 86.3

In the seasons post 2014 top 100 project, the PG situation in new york did not improve at all:

14-15: Shane Larkin, Langston Galloway, 37 yr old prigioni, 33 yr old calderon

15-16: Langston Galloway, rookie Jerian Grant, 34 yr old Caldeorn — this PG rotation was so poor that carmelo ended up leading the team in APG and just about equaled calderon in AST%

16-17: Rose, Jennings, rookie Ron Baker

Jennings was really the one penetrate and dish PG the knicks had in those 3 seasons. He even seemed to buy in to the fact that he can’t shoot and really got everyone involved. Of course, he had rose starting in front of him, so his time on the floor with melo was limited. He was used more in bench lineups that actually thrived, relatively speaking.

In an era where dynamic PG play is paramount, knicks management abhorrently ignored the position. I don’t think you can find such ineptitude in a front office with playoff aspirations outside of the cousins-era kings.

- - - - -

Peak carmelo developed into one of the best offensive players in the league. The “iso melo” stigma really became an outdated narrative as you saw all he really needed was a decent PG rotation to keep the ball moving (a little different, but billups certainly got the best out of him in denver). He became one of the better off the ball players in 12-13, actually shooting more efficiently and on higher volume than durant in catch and shoot situations. His transition to a great 3 pt shooter also opened up his game, and he stepped into transition 3s about as well as anyone in the league.

He’s obviously known for his great post up and face up game, but not acknowledged as much for being a great offensive rebounder for his position. He had a deceptively quick second jump and soft touch around the rim for put backs. He also possessed a unique rolling spin move to the hoop i’m not sure anyone else in the league has. The one thing he was really average at is finishing at the rim, and i’d say that partially has to do with him not being able to take advantage of the way the game is called these days. He isn’t a freak show athlete like lebron, and he doesn’t have those long strides like durant / harden where they know the angles and draw fouls as easily as they do.

Carmelo had the full repertoire going with his career high 62 pts against charlotte last season (they ranked 5th in DRTG):



I then look at someone like dominique, who was voted in at #62, and I think a 20 spot gap between the two is pushing it. Take a look at how they compare over their first 11 seasons (dominique actually comes off as worse if you look at his whole career):

http://bkref.com/tiny/KSWoH

They’re very comparable in most areas, and carmelo actually comes out as the better postseason performer, something wilkins was well criticized for, but still managed to get voted in much earlier. I noted trex's argument in past threads about nique consistently carrying offenses with not much support. It's a valid point, although again it's 18 spots later.

There always seemed to be this all or nothing evaluation of carmelo where he’d be expected to be as good as lebron / durant (which he obviously isn’t), or he’s barely a top 20 player in the league. You may want to fault him for forcing his way to NY, but let’s not pretend like many players voted in already haven’t done the same.

ronnymac brings up a good point about low turnovers being a plus for high usage players. Below are are 20+ PPG scorers in the playoffs (excluding centers) sorted by TO% (best to worst):

http://bkref.com/tiny/HO11E

Of course there are guys at the “bottom” who were very successful, but the lower TO% can help offset some of the decrease in efficiency we see with carmelo in the playoffs.

Then we get to the clutch play. 82games.com looked at shot data from 04-09 in the reg season + 04-08 in the post season. Carmelo was 6th in the league in game winners, but #1 in the league by far in FG% on game winners at 48.1%:

http://82games.com/gamewinningshots.htm

By 2011, he already had enough game winners to choose from to create a top 10 for his career:



For clutch data from 2000-2012, carmelo was 7th in the league in FG%, and 50% of his FGs were assisted, which is interesting to note for being criticized for holding the ball too long.

http://bit.ly/1wnySdJ

[I’d obviously prefer eFG% or TS% for these figures, but they weren’t available here]

I’m aware that he hasn’t been quite as clutch over the last few seasons, but i attribute some of that to fatigue (he led the league in MPG last season) and the makeup of his teams. He’s still had his fair share of clutch moments since coming to NY, and hit multiple game winners during his first season here. He did give us this gem in 2012 as well:



Carmelo gets a decent amount of flack for his playoff resume, and I think it’s a little overstated, so I’d like to provide some context for each season. It also seems to get pushed aside that making the playoffs 10 seasons in a row is no big deal or something, especially when the majority of them came out west. Below is carmelo’s team SRS rank and the opponent’s SRS rank that he lost to in the playoffs.

CARMELO SRS RANK / OPPONENT SRS RANK

04 - 11th / 2nd
05 - 10th / 1st (eventual NBA champion spurs)
06 - 15th / 9th
07 - 9th / 1st (eventual NBA champion spurs)
08 - 11th / 2nd
09 - 8th / 3rd (eventual NBA champion lakers)
10 - 8th / 3rd
11 - 15th / 6th
12 - 11th / 4th (eventual NBA champion heat)
13 - 7th / 9th

Aside from 2013, the team he lost to has always been favored in SRS, with 4 of the 10 series losses coming to the eventual NBA champs. To me, this doesn’t reflect a player who’s come up short when he’s been expected to go farther in the playoffs. You can make the argument that if he was a better player, he may have been favored in more series, but that only goes so far.

It’s clear that he hasn’t been as fortunate as some other players as far as who he’s played with. Some more details on his recent playoff loses:

09 - This run to the WCF almost gets glossed over at times. Nuggets were 2 wins away from the finals, losing to the eventual NBA champion lakers, who were just flat out the better team.

He had some great performances during that run.

11 - Billups gets hurt in game 1 against boston (out for rest of series), then amare gets hurt in game 2 only playing 17 min. First 2 games are decided by 2 and 3 points respectively.

Tony douglas forced to play PG for the rest of the series, basically putting it out of reach.

12 - Disastrous # of injuries. Tyson chandler finishes off a DPOY season, and of course gets the flu as soon as the playoffs start. Lin doesn’t come back for the playoffs, shumpert and douglas only play 1 game a piece, baron davis eventually goes down, and the knicks are only left with 33 yr old mike bibby to run the point, who already had 1 foot in retirement.

13 - First time since carmelo came to the knicks that they really looked like a team who could make a run to the finals. PG play was always an issue prior to this season, and felton came up big in the 1st round against boston. Ball movement flowing with kidd and prigioni as well. Then in the 2nd round against indiana, chandler again doesn’t look himself, which would later be revealed that he had an “undisclosed illness” during the series. I think there’s a good chance they beat the pacers with a healthy chandler, and who knows what happens from there.

Here are the best players carmelo’s played with over the course of his career: andre miller (first few seasons of carmelo's career), kenyon martin (often injured), post 30s iverson, camby (often injured), JR smith, nene (often injured), billups, afflalo, amare (often injured), tyson chandler (often injured), kidd in his last season, in shape felton and porzingis' rookie/soph year.

Outside of iverson, that’s a collection of good players, but nothing that screams "consistent second option", or even "consistent first option" if you want to push carmelo down a notch. Porzingis and carmelo actually had great chemistry until rose came along, but their timelines unfortunately didn't match up. Fit is clearly important, too, and while iverson and carmelo never had "problems" with each other, it wasn't working. It’s not an accident that carmelo’s best seasons came with billups running the show in 2009 and a knicks team in 2013 which focused heavily on keeping the ball moving and quick decision making.

With regard to how carmelo’s career is perceived, I always go back to pierce before garnett and allen came along. Even if we agree that pierce is the better player, he had only been to the conf finals once before that trade, and i’m not sure how his career progresses without those trades being made. Does he stick with it in boston and not make anymore playoff runs? Does he eventually go to another team? I just wonder how carmelo would be looked at had he been fortunate enough to play with teammates of that caliber in his prime.
penbeast0
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Posts: 30,240
And1: 9,820
Joined: Aug 14, 2004
Location: South Florida
 

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 #82 

Post#4 » by penbeast0 » Thu Jan 18, 2018 4:11 pm

Vote: Mel Daniels
Alternate: James Worthy


I know the early ABA was a pretty weak league but when you are going up against guys like Carmelo Anthony or Chris Webber, both fine scorers but neither of whom moved the needle much for their teams most of their career, a guy who was a 2 time MVP winner and the best or second best player on 3 championship teams should be looking pretty strong, even with a relatively short career. As Doctor MJ said, winners win for a reason.

Mel Daniels is certainly the only multiple MVP winner left. Nobody else changed or dominanted on both ends to the same degree for more than 1-1.5 years (Walton, Hawkins). Daniels was the best player on two championship teams plus a willing support role on a third championship though in a weak league (probably better than the pre-Russell 50s though). I tend to value defense, particularly for big men, and Mel was basically the original Alonzo Mourning with more rebounding but less shotblocking. He was a 1st round NBA pick (the first to sign with the ABA) and in the NBA would probably have been one of the best centers as well, not in the Jabbar league but then neither was anyone else, but contending with Unseld/Cowens for the rebounding leaderboard and 2nd team All-Defense and with 15-20ppg scoring on limited range (He did a lot of outside shooting his first year . . . badly; coaching of the day didn't like centers out of the post though). Like Zo, his playmaking was mediocre but in addition to strong rebounding and defense, he was Indiana's intimidator, in a league where everyone was trying to make a name for themselves. And, he did it without major foul trouble issues. The two MVPs show he was valued above his box scores.

It is reasonable to compare Daniels to Kawhi Leonard as they have similar length of career by now. Kawhi brings excellent wing defense early on, but Daniels was probably more impactful defensively as intimidating defensive centers tend to be (especially in the 20th century). Kawhi's defense is still good and his scoring has blown up, a clearly better option than Daniels; also clearly a better passer. Daniels brings rebounding and toughness at a level equal to guys like Wes Unseld or Dave Cowens who are already in from his era (other league). I think the impact Daniels brought was appreciably higher in his league than that Kawhi has in the current league, enough to overcome the much weaker league he played in. Connie Hawkins would be another early ABA guy, higher peak than Daniels, shorter career though he did have a 1st team All-NBA between his first and second major knee injury. More of a career than Walton, less than Daniels. With careers this short, the difference is magnified. Of the bunch, I rate Daniels the highest.

Bill Sharman is probably the best 50s guy left, Greer or Bellamy from the 60s (Bells wasn't a great team player but it was a center's league). Paul Silas or David Thompson from the 70s? Worthy from the 80s (ahead of Bernard King or Mark Aquirre who were the Carmelos of their day). Rodman from the 90s for pure defensive impact. In the 00s, Webber has been getting traction, but as a Washington fan, the combination of his unwillingness to hold position defensively, his poor foul draw, his tendency to go for the highlight rather than the smart play (even with passing, his greatest strength), and his poor team dynamics (unwillingness to play center on a team with 3 PFs, lazy practice habits, and being a whiny "We won, they lost" type with a history of choking make him drop well below his raw boxscore stats for me. Mark Gasol or Kawhi Leonard for active players, I might vote Kawhi here except for the fact that SA doesn't seem to falter at all when he is missing.
[/quote]
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
penbeast0
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Posts: 30,240
And1: 9,820
Joined: Aug 14, 2004
Location: South Florida
 

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 #82 

Post#5 » by penbeast0 » Thu Jan 18, 2018 4:14 pm

Clyde Frazier wrote:Vote 1 - Carmelo Anthony...

I then look at someone like dominique, who was voted in at #62, and I think an 18 spot gap between the two is pushing it....


Maybe Nique was too early, I know I didn't vote for him that high.
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
User avatar
Outside
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 10,052
And1: 16,679
Joined: May 01, 2017
 

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 #82 

Post#6 » by Outside » Thu Jan 18, 2018 10:40 pm

Vote: James Worthy
Alternate: Carmelo Anthony


Rather than restate what has already been said, I'll just quote a nice summation of Worthy:

trex_8063 wrote:Some may argue Worthy hit the lottery in landing on the Lakers at that time; and some also suggest his scoring capability is inflated by playing with Magic. But consider a couple things:
*I recall an analysis that indicated his scoring and efficiency in games Magic missed during his prime basically didn't skip a beat. There were always scorers on those Laker teams: Kareem could score and wanted his touches, Magic could score, and there was usually at least one other pretty good scorer (Byron Scott or maybe Norm Nixon); so Worthy always had to share the ball, which perhaps limited his volume compared to what he may have received elsewhere. Looking at Worthy's offensive game (one of the great transition running/finishing forwards, could also demolish his man in single-coverage from the elbow, decent post game, and not a bad mid-range shooter), it's not hard to imagine prime Worthy dropping 22-24 ppg on respectable (~55% or so) TS in a "lesser" scenario. Worthy was a legit scorer.
**Worthy [to my knowledge] never griped about having to share the spotlight, share the touches, and generally be perceived as a the 2nd or even 3rd banana on the team. In interviews I've heard, he seems an intelligent and well-spoken man, and I've never read a word of dissent attributed to teammates or coaches. This is counter to some of the issues we've been discussing wrt other players. Worthy seems a true team player.

Few other nuts and bolts (both good and bad):
*My primary criticisms of him are that he was a mediocre (to slightly weak) rebounding SF/combo forward, and his longevity is only so-so. Not bad on the latter: 12 seasons, 11 of which he was at least a useful role player, and very durable, too (>30,000 rs minutes logged in those 12 years), and a 7-8 year prime......just not exceptional either.
**Solid/decent defender, probably versatile enough to guard either the 4 or 3 position.
***Excellent turnover economy.


Ideally (and in the future), we'd like a little more than this, but will let it pass as you have provided your own argumentation for Worthy in prior threads. trex
If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention.
dhsilv2
RealGM
Posts: 49,570
And1: 26,748
Joined: Oct 04, 2015

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 #82 

Post#7 » by dhsilv2 » Thu Jan 18, 2018 10:50 pm

penbeast0 wrote:
Clyde Frazier wrote:Vote 1 - Carmelo Anthony...

I then look at someone like dominique, who was voted in at #62, and I think an 18 spot gap between the two is pushing it....


Maybe Nique was too early, I know I didn't vote for him that high.


Is there really THAT much separating 62 and 100?
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,573
And1: 8,207
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 #82 

Post#8 » by trex_8063 » Fri Jan 19, 2018 2:51 am

Clyde Frazier wrote:Vote 2 - Tiny Archibald



On Tiny......

Personally, I'm not feeling him yet. I know he was one of the 50 greatest players on that 1996 list, and he commonly falls somewhere in the top 55-75 range (if not higher) on many more recent mainstream lists (was #74 on the 2014 RealGM list, and I must admit, I had him ranked #49 back in 2012!); but the more I scrutinize........like I said previously: the more I tend to buck the status quo.

Tiny's peak----('73), that wtf 34/11 season----does look remarkable. And to his credit, those ridiculous numbers came at the head of the #1 offense in the league. otoh, they were also the dead-last team defensively (and only treading water overall), so you end up wondering if some manner of "offense at the expense of defense" was by design. It nonetheless could be argued as a top 50 peak, imo.
However, there are a lot of opinions to the effect of the NBA being a sort of watered down league in the early-mid 70's (and frankly, there's some weight to those arguments). Additionally, this year is a clear outlier for Archibald; '72 is the only other year where he even remotely approaches that. Overall, his prime----which is short [more on that below]----isn't overly remarkable.

And then he doesn't have much outside of his prime to add career value. Although he was selected as an All-Star in '80-'82, from a statistical standpoint he looks like a mildly above average player in '80, slightly above average in '81, and league-average in '82. i.e. one or two of those selections almost appear "by default".
Anecdotally, you read some suggestions of their offense running more smoothly with Tiny in the picture, but in WOWY terms it's not a big change.

And while the guy reportedly had quick hands and feet, he was 6'1" in shoes, maybe as much as 160 lbs soaking wet (150 lbs listed on bbref), so I have to suspect that on the defensive end he was exploitable in the post, could get hung up on screens, and was generally at a height/reach disadvantage when it came to contesting shots. Game footage in his prime is in precious short supply to offset these concerns/assumptions; perhaps Owly could chime in with some report from the Pro Basketball Handbook, but I have a hard time imagining him as anything better than mediocre defensively (and wouldn't be surprised if he was a small liability many years).

Back to his longevity:
Well.....it's kinda poor. His prime is only about six seasons (TWO of which were fairly well eroded by injury), and an outlier peak which perhaps deludes how good he actually was [on average] in his prime. And then he really only has about 4 other seasons in which he was a halfway decent rotational player (not a ton of career value added in any of them).


Overall, somewhere circa-#90 is as high as I feel I could possibly justify him by my standards/criteria, and outside the top 100 is perfectly reasonable, imo. I actually no longer have him in my top 100, in fact.
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
User avatar
Clyde Frazier
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 20,222
And1: 26,100
Joined: Sep 07, 2010

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 #82 

Post#9 » by Clyde Frazier » Fri Jan 19, 2018 4:37 am

trex_8063 wrote:
Clyde Frazier wrote:Vote 2 - Tiny Archibald



On Tiny......

Personally, I'm not feeling him yet. I know he was one of the 50 greatest players on that 1996 list, and he commonly falls somewhere in the top 55-75 range (if not higher) on many more recent mainstream lists (was #74 on the 2014 RealGM list, and I must admit, I had him ranked #49 back in 2012!); but the more I scrutinize........like I said previously: the more I tend to buck the status quo.

Tiny's peak----('73), that wtf 34/11 season----does look remarkable. And to his credit, those ridiculous numbers came at the head of the #1 offense in the league. otoh, they were also the dead-last team defensively (and only treading water overall), so you end up wondering if some manner of "offense at the expense of defense" was by design. It nonetheless could be argued as a top 50 peak, imo.
However, there are a lot of opinions to the effect of the NBA being a sort of watered down league in the early-mid 70's (and frankly, there's some weight to those arguments). Additionally, this year is a clear outlier for Archibald; '72 is the only other year where he even remotely approaches that. Overall, his prime----which is short [more on that below]----isn't overly remarkable.

And then he doesn't have much outside of his prime to add career value. Although he was selected as an All-Star in '80-'82, from a statistical standpoint he looks like a mildly above average player in '80, slightly above average in '81, and league-average in '82. i.e. one or two of those selections almost appear "by default".
Anecdotally, you read some suggestions of their offense running more smoothly with Tiny in the picture, but in WOWY terms it's not a big change.

And while the guy reportedly had quick hands and feet, he was 6'1" in shoes, maybe as much as 160 lbs soaking wet (150 lbs listed on bbref), so I have to suspect that on the defensive end he was exploitable in the post, could get hung up on screens, and was generally at a height/reach disadvantage when it came to contesting shots. Game footage in his prime is in precious short supply to offset these concerns/assumptions; perhaps Owly could chime in with some report from the Pro Basketball Handbook, but I have a hard time imagining him as anything better than mediocre defensively (and wouldn't be surprised if he was a small liability many years).

Back to his longevity:
Well.....it's kinda poor. His prime is only about six seasons (TWO of which were fairly well eroded by injury), and an outlier peak which perhaps deludes how good he actually was [on average] in his prime. And then he really only has about 4 other seasons in which he was a halfway decent rotational player (not a ton of career value added in any of them).


Overall, somewhere circa-#90 is as high as I feel I could possibly justify him by my standards/criteria, and outside the top 100 is perfectly reasonable, imo. I actually no longer have him in my top 100, in fact.


I value longevity pretty highly like you, so when I start looking at a guy who lacked there, I do have to think about whether i'm really ready for them yet. I look at his career vs. worthy's, and regular season-wise it's actually quite comparable. Worthy has the clear edge in the playoffs, but I do factor in his playing with ATG teammates, something tiny lacked until coming to boston post-prime. I remember from the top 100 project in 2014 coming away pretty impressed with his contribution to their title run in 81.

So while I'd have worthy coming up soon after, I'm giving tiny the edge here due to a higher peak and the feeling that he's slipping through the cracks a bit.
pandrade83
Starter
Posts: 2,040
And1: 604
Joined: Jun 07, 2017
     

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 #82 

Post#10 » by pandrade83 » Fri Jan 19, 2018 5:23 am

Primary: Tim Hardaway
Alternate: Chris Webber



I'm breaking the seal on Hardaway a little bit, so he's maybe been overlooked.

Here's my arguments for:

1.Hardaway is recognized as an elite player consistently in a competitive era

We are down to a handful of players that made All-NBA 5 X+ post-merger:

Carmelo Anthony
Tim Hardaway
Chris Webber
Yao Ming
Amare Stoudamire
Mitch Richmond

Of that group, if we filter it down further to players who made at least one first team squad, here's your list:

Tim Hardaway
Amare Stoudamire
Chris Webber

Of that group, just Hardaway & Webber finished Top 5 in MVP voting at any point in their career.

2. The Advanced Metrics/Impact Stats view him highly

-Shut up & Jam's NPI RAPM ratings (chained unweighted 5 year avg) has him as a low-level all-star from '97-'01. The two year '97 &'98 RAPM score him as about the 9th best player in a typical year with '97 scoring 2nd highest overall. While RAPM definitely gets to pick up his best year, his 2nd-4th best years are probably '91, '98, '92 (you could make an argument for flipping '91 & '98) so there's likely high impact years being omitted.

-Of the years he missed material time, his WOWY numbers are +4 in '92 & '95 each & +14 in '00.

-In '96 after trading for him, the Heat went 18-11 & were 24-29 pre-trade. The Warriors went 11-18 after the trade & were 25-28 pre-trade - indicating he upgraded the Heat & his loss caused a downgrade in the Warriors.

-Miami would have its best year by SRS when Hardaway - not Mourning - led the team in WS & '98 & '99 are virtually equal with Hardaway leading the team in WS.

3. From a Box Score standpoint, he is a very effective playmaker & scorer with strong turnover economy.

-Only four players in league history have recorded a 20 point, 9 assist >54% TS season while also achieving < 15% TOV economy:

Chris Paul, Tim Hardaway & James Harden. Hardaway is the only player to do so more than a decade ago.

-If you change the query to make it more pace based, & do 25 points + per 100 & > 40% assists, Chris Paul & Tony Parker are the only players to achieve it more than once.

Given that I'm the first to back him, I'm going to try and address some of the potential reasons why I'm the first:

1. Weak longevity - Hardaway logged 31 K Career Minutes and made All-NBA Teams 8 seasons apart.

2. Other point guards have been brought up as being better (Price in a separate thread, Archibald). - Hardaway has significantly more career WS than Price indicating better quality longevity; Archibald's career is very much a roller coaster. He put up huge stats on bad teams and so much of his career value is tied up in one year ('73) so the Archibald argument is a peak driven one. Hardaway also produced in a more competitive area.

3. Hardaway has a shaky playoff resume that saw him lose 4 times with HCA - Hardaway has what I'll call a mixed playoff resume.
3A. If you're going to note the rare company Hardaway is in other places, he's one of the rare players to lose in the 1st round while leading an SRS 5+ Team in WS.

'91 - Averages 25/11 plus 3 steals per game as the W's upset the Spurs in round 1 - losing to the Lakers in round 2. Good year.
'92 - Averaged 25/7/4 but shooting metrics are blah (51%) and the Warriors are upset by the Sonics. Defense was the bigger issue in the defeat (giving up 117 per 100 possessions to the Sonics). Mixed.
'96 - Heat are swept by the Bulls as Hardaway averages 18-6 on 57% TS but has 5 TO pg. Sub-par.
'97 - Hardaway gets his ass kicked by Penny in round 1 but redeems himself against the Knicks in round 2, culminating in a monster Game 7 saving the Heat. Mourning is outplayed decisively by Ewing but the Heat advance on the strength of Hardaway. Hardaway is miserable against the Bulls. Mixed.
'98 - The Heat are upset by the Knicks, but Hardaway plays well - averaging 26/7 on 59% TS. Good year.
'99 & 2000 are both bad years where the Heat lose to the Knicks w/ HCA.

4. Box Score Stats like Win Shares & VORP aren't fond of him

Tackling VORP first - We know that this is derived from BPM & BPM gives him some pretty ugly defensive scores. I think that this is a little bit of a miss for 3 reasons:

1) The RAPM data we have of his Miami years paints him as a neutral impact player on that end - he has no negative years from '97-'01 (but nothing impactful either).
2) He's an opportunistic ball thief who generates a fair amount of steals. You see him with solid defensive efforts in the video I posted above.
3) Other strong point guards of the era don't go off on him (cliff notes: He holds Isiah, Payton & Price below normal, KJ, Stockton & Magic get their typical #'s against him)

Stockton http://bkref.com/tiny/Hu3Wl
Isiah http://bkref.com/tiny/O2kos
Payton http://bkref.com/tiny/l1s9I
KJ http://bkref.com/tiny/QzMdm
Mark Price http://bkref.com/tiny/82snI
Magic http://bkref.com/tiny/Kh6fj
4) The Warrior teams he was on had garbage for rim protection

Tackling WS next: We know that WS has a big winners bias & Hardaway was stuck in a somewhat dysfunctional franchise for his first few years - that dovetails into:

5. Why did Golden State miss the playoffs twice including a 56 loss season with him as their leader?

The '95 season was a total mess for the Warriors. Don Nelson got fired midway through the year, Webber got traded for Tom Gougliotta (sp) who misses half the season, Mullin misses virtually the entire year and 14 dudes log 600+ minutes.

Your Top 8 in MInutes Played:
Spree
Hardaway
Keith Jennings
Clifford Rozier
Chris Gatling
David Wood
Tom Gugliotta (sp)
Victor Alexander

of course that team sucked - not to mention Hardaway was coming back from ACL Surgery & missed 20 games. But he still competed - averaged 20-9 while shooting 55% TS despite Spree being the only other player who can command any sort of gravity who was consistently playing.

They got ravaged with injuries the other time they missed the playoffs with him as their leader was '93.

Mullin misses 36 games
Marciuilinoius misses 52 games
Owens misses 45 games

You're not going to do great when you lose your 2nd-4th best players for 1/2 the season each. Hardaway still led a solid offense that was in the positive territory in Offensive Rating.

I'll wrap up with a great video of him in his athletic prime against the Lakers in the playoffs turning in a strong performance. Really one of my favorite players to watch growing up & I think his play earns him a spot on our list.



More to come on Webber when it's time - but my guess is he will be in a run-off soon & I can talk there.
dhsilv2
RealGM
Posts: 49,570
And1: 26,748
Joined: Oct 04, 2015

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 #82 

Post#11 » by dhsilv2 » Fri Jan 19, 2018 10:16 am

trex_8063 wrote:
Clyde Frazier wrote:Vote 2 - Tiny Archibald



On Tiny......

Personally, I'm not feeling him yet. I know he was one of the 50 greatest players on that 1996 list, and he commonly falls somewhere in the top 55-75 range (if not higher) on many more recent mainstream lists (was #74 on the 2014 RealGM list, and I must admit, I had him ranked #49 back in 2012!); but the more I scrutinize........like I said previously: the more I tend to buck the status quo.

Tiny's peak----('73), that wtf 34/11 season----does look remarkable. And to his credit, those ridiculous numbers came at the head of the #1 offense in the league. otoh, they were also the dead-last team defensively (and only treading water overall), so you end up wondering if some manner of "offense at the expense of defense" was by design. It nonetheless could be argued as a top 50 peak, imo.
However, there are a lot of opinions to the effect of the NBA being a sort of watered down league in the early-mid 70's (and frankly, there's some weight to those arguments). Additionally, this year is a clear outlier for Archibald; '72 is the only other year where he even remotely approaches that. Overall, his prime----which is short [more on that below]----isn't overly remarkable.

And then he doesn't have much outside of his prime to add career value. Although he was selected as an All-Star in '80-'82, from a statistical standpoint he looks like a mildly above average player in '80, slightly above average in '81, and league-average in '82. i.e. one or two of those selections almost appear "by default".
Anecdotally, you read some suggestions of their offense running more smoothly with Tiny in the picture, but in WOWY terms it's not a big change.

And while the guy reportedly had quick hands and feet, he was 6'1" in shoes, maybe as much as 160 lbs soaking wet (150 lbs listed on bbref), so I have to suspect that on the defensive end he was exploitable in the post, could get hung up on screens, and was generally at a height/reach disadvantage when it came to contesting shots. Game footage in his prime is in precious short supply to offset these concerns/assumptions; perhaps Owly could chime in with some report from the Pro Basketball Handbook, but I have a hard time imagining him as anything better than mediocre defensively (and wouldn't be surprised if he was a small liability many years).

Back to his longevity:
Well.....it's kinda poor. His prime is only about six seasons (TWO of which were fairly well eroded by injury), and an outlier peak which perhaps deludes how good he actually was [on average] in his prime. And then he really only has about 4 other seasons in which he was a halfway decent rotational player (not a ton of career value added in any of them).


Overall, somewhere circa-#90 is as high as I feel I could possibly justify him by my standards/criteria, and outside the top 100 is perfectly reasonable, imo. I actually no longer have him in my top 100, in fact.


On the 73 team which wasn't a good team due to defense, they were 15th in pace. I'm not sure how a team with one of the slowest paces in the league (17 teams) could be seen as really sacrificing offense for defense, lineups? More over how bad does a point guard have to be defensively to really hurt his team defensively? Same with post play, the 70's weren't an era of big point guards, so how big a liability could be 160 wet really be?

On longevity he was top 10 in MVP voting 5 times with 3 top 10 win years, and has a top 10 VORP year despite his prime mostly being before VORP. 4 top 10 PER seasons (3 top 5) and he did all this in what is certainly more of a big man era than today. No longevity isn't strong here and if you place more value there, he comes up flat. But with you mentioning Leonard in your short list, Tiny's longevity doesn't seem to be that poor given that context.

I'm likely going with him as my alt again though I tend to like to see a bit more team success when a player peaks, that's my biggest hold off and why I took a Greer who peaked far lower earlier despite my general valuing of peaks over other aspects of a career.
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,573
And1: 8,207
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 #82 

Post#12 » by trex_8063 » Fri Jan 19, 2018 3:06 pm

Thru post #11:

James Worthy - 2 (Outside, trex_8063)
Carmelo Anthony - 1 (Clyde Frazier)
Tim Hardaway - 1 (pandrade83)
Mel Daniels - 1 (penbeast0)


About 24 hours left till runoff.

Spoiler:
Ainosterhaspie wrote:.

eminence wrote:.

penbeast0 wrote:.

Owly wrote:.

Clyde Frazier wrote:.

PaulieWal wrote:.

Colbinii wrote:.

Texas Chuck wrote:.

drza wrote:.

Dr Spaceman wrote:.

fpliii wrote:.

euroleague wrote:.

pandrade83 wrote:.

Hornet Mania wrote:.

Eddy_JukeZ wrote:.

SactoKingsFan wrote:.

Blackmill wrote:.

JordansBulls wrote:.

RSCS3_ wrote:.

BasketballFan7 wrote:.

micahclay wrote:.

ardee wrote:.

RCM88x wrote:.

Tesla wrote:.

Joao Saraiva wrote:.

LA Bird wrote:.

MyUniBroDavis wrote:.

kayess wrote:.

2klegend wrote:.

MisterHibachi wrote:.

70sFan wrote:.

mischievous wrote:.

Doctor MJ wrote:.

Dr Positivity wrote:.

Jaivl wrote:.

Bad Gatorade wrote:.

Moonbeam wrote:.

Cyrusman122000 wrote:.

Winsome Gerbil wrote:.

Narigo wrote:.

wojoaderge wrote:.

TrueLAfan wrote:.

90sAllDecade wrote:.

Outside wrote:.

scabbarista wrote:.

janmagn wrote:.

Arman_tanzarian wrote:.

oldschooled wrote:.

Pablo Novi wrote:.

john248 wrote:.

mdonnelly1989 wrote:.

Senior wrote:.

twolves97 wrote:.

CodeBreaker wrote:.

JoeMalburg wrote:.

dhsilv2 wrote:.
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
pandrade83
Starter
Posts: 2,040
And1: 604
Joined: Jun 07, 2017
     

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 #82 

Post#13 » by pandrade83 » Fri Jan 19, 2018 3:09 pm

trex_8063 wrote:Thru post #11:

James Worthy - 2 (Outside, trex_8063)
Carmelo Anthony - 1 (Clyde Frazier)
Mel Daniels - 1 (penbeast0)


About 24 hours left till runoff.

Spoiler:
Ainosterhaspie wrote:.

eminence wrote:.

penbeast0 wrote:.

Owly wrote:.

Clyde Frazier wrote:.

PaulieWal wrote:.

Colbinii wrote:.

Texas Chuck wrote:.

drza wrote:.

Dr Spaceman wrote:.

fpliii wrote:.

euroleague wrote:.

pandrade83 wrote:.

Hornet Mania wrote:.

Eddy_JukeZ wrote:.

SactoKingsFan wrote:.

Blackmill wrote:.

JordansBulls wrote:.

RSCS3_ wrote:.

BasketballFan7 wrote:.

micahclay wrote:.

ardee wrote:.

RCM88x wrote:.

Tesla wrote:.

Joao Saraiva wrote:.

LA Bird wrote:.

MyUniBroDavis wrote:.

kayess wrote:.

2klegend wrote:.

MisterHibachi wrote:.

70sFan wrote:.

mischievous wrote:.

Doctor MJ wrote:.

Dr Positivity wrote:.

Jaivl wrote:.

Bad Gatorade wrote:.

Moonbeam wrote:.

Cyrusman122000 wrote:.

Winsome Gerbil wrote:.

Narigo wrote:.

wojoaderge wrote:.

TrueLAfan wrote:.

90sAllDecade wrote:.

Outside wrote:.

scabbarista wrote:.

janmagn wrote:.

Arman_tanzarian wrote:.

oldschooled wrote:.

Pablo Novi wrote:.

john248 wrote:.

mdonnelly1989 wrote:.

Senior wrote:.

twolves97 wrote:.

CodeBreaker wrote:.

JoeMalburg wrote:.

dhsilv2 wrote:.



Did I do something to disqualify myself?
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,573
And1: 8,207
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 #82 

Post#14 » by trex_8063 » Fri Jan 19, 2018 3:12 pm

pandrade83 wrote:
trex_8063 wrote:Thru post #11:

James Worthy - 2 (Outside, trex_8063)
Carmelo Anthony - 1 (Clyde Frazier)
Mel Daniels - 1 (penbeast0)


About 24 hours left till runoff.

Spoiler:
Ainosterhaspie wrote:.

eminence wrote:.

penbeast0 wrote:.

Owly wrote:.

Clyde Frazier wrote:.

PaulieWal wrote:.

Colbinii wrote:.

Texas Chuck wrote:.

drza wrote:.

Dr Spaceman wrote:.

fpliii wrote:.

euroleague wrote:.

pandrade83 wrote:.

Hornet Mania wrote:.

Eddy_JukeZ wrote:.

SactoKingsFan wrote:.

Blackmill wrote:.

JordansBulls wrote:.

RSCS3_ wrote:.

BasketballFan7 wrote:.

micahclay wrote:.

ardee wrote:.

RCM88x wrote:.

Tesla wrote:.

Joao Saraiva wrote:.

LA Bird wrote:.

MyUniBroDavis wrote:.

kayess wrote:.

2klegend wrote:.

MisterHibachi wrote:.

70sFan wrote:.

mischievous wrote:.

Doctor MJ wrote:.

Dr Positivity wrote:.

Jaivl wrote:.

Bad Gatorade wrote:.

Moonbeam wrote:.

Cyrusman122000 wrote:.

Winsome Gerbil wrote:.

Narigo wrote:.

wojoaderge wrote:.

TrueLAfan wrote:.

90sAllDecade wrote:.

Outside wrote:.

scabbarista wrote:.

janmagn wrote:.

Arman_tanzarian wrote:.

oldschooled wrote:.

Pablo Novi wrote:.

john248 wrote:.

mdonnelly1989 wrote:.

Senior wrote:.

twolves97 wrote:.

CodeBreaker wrote:.

JoeMalburg wrote:.

dhsilv2 wrote:.



Did I do something to disqualify myself?


Whoops, no. I need some more coffee this morning; I somehow just skipped right past that post. Tally edited above. Sorry.
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
dhsilv2
RealGM
Posts: 49,570
And1: 26,748
Joined: Oct 04, 2015

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 #82 

Post#15 » by dhsilv2 » Fri Jan 19, 2018 3:19 pm

I'm sticking with before, and I'm at this point pretty firm on Webber. Tiny is still iffy. I struggle with Nance from a peak level. I'm actually however really REALLY thinking about Sheed here. RAPM likes him over Wallace who we just put in. He doesn't get credit for his play on the blazers...and as I said earlier those teams were a train wreck for anyone, he was just the worst case guy to be there. I also think he was a pretty good off the bench role guy on the celtics for his run there. Anyway he's there and then worthy who feels like I guy I should have already supported but I just guess the "story" of his career didn't motivate me. Rodman is likely a few more down from here and I could see pushing a few other players before him. Though I'm open to why his personality issues weren't really an issue.

I'm also interested in a push for Lenoard. I've already said walton won't make my 100 and I was telling myself leonard with LESS games was out, but I've changed my mind there. He's got the resume to be in with a peak near walton level but without all the missed games and a LOT more quality years. I just need a case that makes me feel he isn't too soon.

Vote - Webber. The more I look over the choices nobody is more complete as a player. He imo had more than enough success with those kings team despite some missed opportunities (lets not get into the refs). He has a reptuation for soft defense, but every metric we have implies he was a value add defender who seemed to be above average as a help defender and at rim protection from the 4 spot. Though i have no objection if people want to claim he was a bit poor against some players in the post. Must like I have no objection to people questioning him as a first option volume scorer.

All that said when I compare Webber to a Nance I'm stuck with a situation where I think Webber can carry a team and Nance can't. Meanwhile, I'd rather add Nance to a contender than Webber. For me to be consistent with how I generally evaluate players, all else equal I would take Webber here. If we're talking Webber vs Issel is interesting. But for me Webber was the clearly better defender. As a scorer Issel looks great, but he dropped off a lot from ABA to NBA days and really he dropped off from 74 to 75, 25-26 age years. As a passer again this is a no question Webber advantage.

So I'm left with longevity, consistency, and intangibles. I don't see Webber as bad in terms of intangables as others here. I would have been pushing webber earlier if he'd been a leader and a better teammate. The talent and the results are good enough imo to have talked about him 5-10 slots ago.

And just an aside, but Webber was surprisingly not an awful role player for the pistons after was was just an awful awful stint in philly.

Alt - I've been mulling this over and I know this is a throw away vote here but I'm really leaning towards Tiny. His 73 season really the more I look impresses me. Lead the league in points and assists, but that team had the number 1 offense to go with those results. Yes it was a one year anomaly it seems, but I'm really big on guys who peaked especially high, and I'm really impressed with the overall box score metrics.

3 top 10's in WS
4 top 10's in PER (3 were top 5)
BPM for what we have is rather strong as well. Though boy it hates his defense, though I'm of the opinion even the worst guard's defense can't be that detrimental.

All star from 80-82 which somewhat says "WTF", but it gives me hope that he was at least as good as the box score metrics which show him as a nice average starter.

I'll be open to changing this one, won't take much as I'm not super confident in Tiny here as if I'm over valuing his peak being MVP worthy, then his longevity likely should move him down a few more spots. But 5 times he was in the top 10 for MVP vote.

Vote Webber
Alt Tiny
Owly
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,614
And1: 3,132
Joined: Mar 12, 2010

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 #82 

Post#16 » by Owly » Fri Jan 19, 2018 6:52 pm

trex_8063 wrote:
Clyde Frazier wrote:Vote 2 - Tiny Archibald



On Tiny......

Personally, I'm not feeling him yet. I know he was one of the 50 greatest players on that 1996 list, and he commonly falls somewhere in the top 55-75 range (if not higher) on many more recent mainstream lists (was #74 on the 2014 RealGM list, and I must admit, I had him ranked #49 back in 2012!); but the more I scrutinize........like I said previously: the more I tend to buck the status quo.

Tiny's peak----('73), that wtf 34/11 season----does look remarkable. And to his credit, those ridiculous numbers came at the head of the #1 offense in the league. otoh, they were also the dead-last team defensively (and only treading water overall), so you end up wondering if some manner of "offense at the expense of defense" was by design. It nonetheless could be argued as a top 50 peak, imo.
However, there are a lot of opinions to the effect of the NBA being a sort of watered down league in the early-mid 70's (and frankly, there's some weight to those arguments). Additionally, this year is a clear outlier for Archibald; '72 is the only other year where he even remotely approaches that. Overall, his prime----which is short [more on that below]----isn't overly remarkable.

And then he doesn't have much outside of his prime to add career value. Although he was selected as an All-Star in '80-'82, from a statistical standpoint he looks like a mildly above average player in '80, slightly above average in '81, and league-average in '82. i.e. one or two of those selections almost appear "by default".
Anecdotally, you read some suggestions of their offense running more smoothly with Tiny in the picture, but in WOWY terms it's not a big change.

And while the guy reportedly had quick hands and feet, he was 6'1" in shoes, maybe as much as 160 lbs soaking wet (150 lbs listed on bbref), so I have to suspect that on the defensive end he was exploitable in the post, could get hung up on screens, and was generally at a height/reach disadvantage when it came to contesting shots. Game footage in his prime is in precious short supply to offset these concerns/assumptions; perhaps Owly could chime in with some report from the Pro Basketball Handbook, but I have a hard time imagining him as anything better than mediocre defensively (and wouldn't be surprised if he was a small liability many years).

Back to his longevity:
Well.....it's kinda poor. His prime is only about six seasons (TWO of which were fairly well eroded by injury), and an outlier peak which perhaps deludes how good he actually was [on average] in his prime. And then he really only has about 4 other seasons in which he was a halfway decent rotational player (not a ton of career value added in any of them).


Overall, somewhere circa-#90 is as high as I feel I could possibly justify him by my standards/criteria, and outside the top 100 is perfectly reasonable, imo. I actually no longer have him in my top 100, in fact.


After rookie season
The Complete Handbook of Pro Basketball 1971-72 – A Jim O’Brien Book [different to later Hollander edited books]
Has trouble on defense … Has tremendous body control, however, and could come a long way in that area this season.

After ’74 (4th year) but mainly in reference to earlier seasons as playing only
1975 Complete Handbook of Pro Basketball
[team section:] Archibald will have to make an effort on defense or will have his problems with [incoming head coach Phil] Johnson. In the past he gave back many of the points he scored.
[player section:]

1977 Complete Handbook of Pro Basketball
[team section:] Archibald can be pesky in a pressing situation, perhaps, but overall he’s a liability.
[player section:]

1978 Complete Handbook of Pro Basketball
[team section:] Archibald can be a pest, but he can’t contain anyone over 40 minutes.
[player section:]

DNP in the prior, 77-78, season.
1979 Complete Handbook of Pro Basketball
[team section:] In Archibald, Knight and Barnes, they have acquired offensive talents who can make it an exciting team, but a porous one as well.
[player section:]

1980 Complete Handbook of Pro Basketball
[team section:] Archibald has lost a step and can’t guard his house.
[player section:]

1981 Complete Handbook of Pro Basketball
[team section:] Archibald is adequate against players his size (both of them).
[player section:]

No mentions of his D in either section of the ’82 Handbook

1983 Complete Handbook of Pro Basketball
[team section:] Archibald can be beaten because of his size …
[player section:]


Takeaways … obviously mainly bad but I’ll give alternative reads on it.

Positive read: Not generally an effective defender but … never bad enough for it to warrant a mention his player profile, so never a hugely significant factor. Some positive indicators in terms of ability to pressure the ball, body control. Offensive burden and minutes burden limited his capacity to reach defensive potential. This sympathetic read would probably cite injuries as a mitigating factor (e.g. rerun his career with minutes and burden managed better and he could be okay).

Negative read: All mentions mainly negative and his negative defensive usually significant enough to get mentioned in the team’s defense section. Reviews include “liability”, "porous", "will have to make an effort" and “can’t guard his house”. This critical read would probably just note his frequently being injured and that his often compromising his mobility, his main advantage at that size.

Advocates for the more sympathetic view might point to the fact he was kept and played by Boston, and that Boston were good defensively with him playing big minutes (as supporting minimal impact, and unreasonable demands and bad team contexts elsewhere). Advocates for the more critical read would probably point to the bulk of his career elsewhere.
Owly
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,614
And1: 3,132
Joined: Mar 12, 2010

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 #82 

Post#17 » by Owly » Fri Jan 19, 2018 9:03 pm

On “the field”, their arguments (and Elton Brand)

Worthy – On being okay without Magic … a counter argument is the sudden drop-off after Magic leaves. One can offer aging as the cause and this will certainly be part of it, and we can see him falling off in ’91 already. Nevertheless his rate of Offensive Win Shares plummets and OBPM halves (the distance above league average) from the previous year and hits, to that point a career low, though as noted still above league average (and Win Shares where he isn't is perhaps overly concerned with shooting efficiency?) Calculations in the spoiler
Spoiler:
[Offensive Win Shares per 96 game minutes – this done to make it comparable with actual WS/48 – only half the 96 minutes will be offensive so average per 48 would be 0.050, per 96 is 0.0100; but obviously whilst this is per 48 minutes of offense, this is no longer a “per game” type metric so could be thought to be exaggerating the fall … trying to be open here. Calculations somewhat approximate as season OWS only given to one dp.

Year: OWS, Minutes, OWS/96 (i.e. (OWS÷minutes)x96)
’91: 5.5, 3008, 0.175531915
’92: 1.4, 2108, 0.063757116

PER holds up better in part as usage increases a little (though also a clear boost in assist %) probably an open question whether this is necessity with Magic gone, or questionable BBIQ with Threatt, Green, Scott, Perkins and when healthy Divac more efficient and perhaps capable of marginally more each. Mind you it’s only up a little, but I guess the question is with poor efficiency should it be dropping and if he’s helping (he is passing more). As ever these things are open to interpretation.

Refrain (or variation on): He’s more significant historically than Elton Brand, is he better? Would his teams be better if they swapped (or vice-versa for Brand’s teams), if done fairly (obviously positional equivalents become and issue)?

Carmelo – Issues with an argument versus Wilkins (particularly in terms of relevance and limitations of appeal) have been covered in this thread and elsewhere. Him versus Brand was posted last thread though I forgot to put last season as a cut-off (this boost Melo’s career PER by .3, probably increased at the margin by a rounding issue). http://bkref.com/tiny/zm7eD. Despite a prime cut down by injury … Brand is better by Win Shares despite worse teammates, and with a better WS/48 peak; despite PER overvaluing scoring he’s close on PER; he’s better on BPM and he’s better in terms of intangibles and defense.

Mel Daniels – I think I’ve already done this (line of argument) in this project but for Daniels, the refrain is slightly different than the other candidates here. More significant perhaps with the titles, MVPs but … was he better than Zelmo Beaty? http://bkref.com/tiny/SiiSN . Not apples to apples here as we’ve got Zelmo’s NBA and ABA numbers combined (technically true of Daniels except NBA numbers aren’t much proportionally). Still a starting point I think.

Tim Hardaway – I won’t necessarily go for the Brand refrain here (I think I’d prefer Brand but I can see the possibility of dynamic playmaker like Hardaway having a case, though he does again have more of a “star” perception advantage). I would argue with the characterisation of the playoffs as mixed. Now, as ever, playoffs are, relative to just about everyone else, way lower weighted by me – injuries, small sample size, player matchups, team matchups, uneven levels of competition, uneven weighting of different years etc etc. That said … there’s only three players in numerically dropping off as Hardaway from RS to playoffs Karl Malone (with incredible longevity and starting from a substantially greater height); Moncrief (with non-boxscore as potential mitigation) and Dominique Wilkins (starting from a greater height and with better longevity). I’ll throw in similar droppers (though perhaps somewhat to do with the shape of their playoff career) who could potentially at least have a case made for them for the top 100: Sabonis and Johnston (could have put Schrempf in here his drop offs are very slightly less bad than this group – and I’m assuming no one will be making a case for Drazen Petrovic, Clifford Robinson or Stephon Marbury). http://bkref.com/tiny/mr1Z5

Playoffs aside it’s not so much that I don’t see a case for Hardaway but maybe he doesn’t separate himself a great deal from a pack of modern-ish era point guards. What makes him better than all of … Porter, Cassell, Cheeks, Gus Williams, Price, Blaylock, Andre Miller, Brandon, Penny, Strickland, Baron Davis. Throw in Nate Archibald and maybe Lenny Wilkens and Bob Davies from earlier (though Davies can’t really be compared fairly, I’d just want to mention him). I’d put Timmy towards the top of the list (over some without really thinking, but thinking being the point here and wanting to be fairly complete – though my reference database has a blind-spot for the last six-odd years - would Conley edge onto that list?), but there’s enough possible competition that I’d be interested in the criteria and the process that hashim better than all of them.


Finally, and tell me to back off if treading on any toes here but … is quoting someone else’s argument from the same thread enough to get counted (without at least urging digging back to best bits of previous lines of argument – if giving leeway for having previously given reasoning) on first ballot, first preference? Sorry if not appropriate.

Okay am getting tired so am leaving perhaps cutting and polishing Hardway's section and addressing Webber properly (though at a glance did he "carry" any teams that didn't do fine without him anywhere? And in any case versus Nance now somewhat moot).
penbeast0
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Posts: 30,240
And1: 9,820
Joined: Aug 14, 2004
Location: South Florida
 

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 #82 

Post#18 » by penbeast0 » Fri Jan 19, 2018 9:41 pm

Owly wrote: ...
Playoffs aside it’s not so much that I don’t see a case for Hardaway but maybe he doesn’t separate himself a great deal from a pack of modern-ish era point guards. What makes him better than all of … Porter, Cassell, Cheeks, Gus Williams, Price, Blaylock, Andre Miller, Brandon, Penny, Strickland, Baron Davis. Throw in Nate Archibald and maybe Lenny Wilkens and Bob Davies from earlier (though Davies can’t really be compared fairly, I’d just want to mention him). I’d put Timmy towards the top of the list (over some without really thinking, but thinking being the point here and wanting to be fairly complete – though my reference database has a blind-spot for the last six-odd years - would Conley edge onto that list?), but there’s enough possible competition that I’d be interested in the criteria and the process that hashim better than all of them....


Interested to see a direct comparison with Archibald as well as some of the others Owly mentioned for those who are supporting either one. (Porter, Cheeks, Gus, Mark Price, Blaylock, and Penny . . . can't see any of the others getting in here though I am willing to listen if there is a case). The problem with Brand is that throughout his career, he was just never relevant . . . possibly because he was always on bad teams but while he matches up statistically, he just wasn't a guy you worried about that much. Sort of like Terry Cummings who was always one of my favorites but also suffered the curse of Clipperdom.
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
trex_8063
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 12,573
And1: 8,207
Joined: Feb 24, 2013
     

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 #82 

Post#19 » by trex_8063 » Fri Jan 19, 2018 10:56 pm

Owly wrote:On “the field”, their arguments (and Elton Brand)

Worthy – On being okay without Magic … a counter argument is the sudden drop-off after Magic leaves. One can offer aging as the cause and this will certainly be part of it, and we can see him falling off in ’91 already.


Additionally, I read one report that the ankle injury he suffered in G5 of the '91 WCF (and the decision to continue playing the rest of their playoff run) did some lasting damage, which was robbing him of some of his quickness in the '92 season. And then he had the season-ending knee injury in early March 1992, and that was pretty much it for his career.
"The fact that a proposition is absurd has never hindered those who wish to believe it." -Edward Rutherfurd
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
pandrade83
Starter
Posts: 2,040
And1: 604
Joined: Jun 07, 2017
     

Re: RealGM 2017 Top 100 #82 

Post#20 » by pandrade83 » Sat Jan 20, 2018 1:01 am

Owly wrote:

Tim Hardaway – I won’t necessarily go for the Brand refrain here (I think I’d prefer Brand but I can see the possibility of dynamic playmaker like Hardaway having a case, though he does again have more of a “star” perception advantage). I would argue with the characterisation of the playoffs as mixed. Now, as ever, playoffs are, relative to just about everyone else, way lower weighted by me – injuries, small sample size, player matchups, team matchups, uneven levels of competition, uneven weighting of different years etc etc. That said … there’s only three players in numerically dropping off as Hardaway from RS to playoffs Karl Malone (with incredible longevity and starting from a substantially greater height); Moncrief (with non-boxscore as potential mitigation) and Dominique Wilkins (starting from a greater height and with better longevity). I’ll throw in similar droppers (though perhaps somewhat to do with the shape of their playoff career) who could potentially at least have a case made for them for the top 100: Sabonis and Johnston (could have put Schrempf in here his drop offs are very slightly less bad than this group – and I’m assuming no one will be making a case for Drazen Petrovic, Clifford Robinson or Stephon Marbury). http://bkref.com/tiny/mr1Z5




May I ask which specific year you disagree with how I wrote about him - or are you referencing the aggregated data you pulled? I think it's relevant to look at the specific year by year performance if weak playoff performance is a critique.

I tried to use pretty candid language "blah, Sub-Par, gets his ass kicked, miserable, bad" as I didn't want to come off as sugar-coating the issue. You see that I addressed it and I was obviously aware that it could be a potential issue for a voter - I'm just trying to get at the heart of what you're saying. I thought he had enough high impact performances - including two key series in his career - that "mixed" was fair.

Return to Player Comparisons