RealGM 2017 Top 100 #87 (Elton Brand)

[trex_8063]

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. James Worthy
83. Chris Webber
84. Rasheed Wallace
85. Dennis Rodman
86. Horace Grant
87. ????

Begin...

Spoiler:

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

[penbeast0]

Vote: Mel Daniels
Alternate: Elton Brand

Why Mel Daniels? It may be winner's bias, but when I see a team win multiple championships, I tend to look more closely at the makeup of the teams to see WHY they are winning. I don't automatically value big minute contributors to championships, I have been down on Bob Cousy's role on those Celtic titles for example. However, I do value the championships a lot and how a team got there. Indiana was the Boston Celtics of the ABA. They didn't have nearly the big name stars of Kentucky (Gilmore, Issel, Dampier), New York (Erving, Kenon), or even San Antonio (Gervin, Silas, Paultz) but they won the most and the most consistently. Breaking those teams down, Slick Leonard was a competent coach but had little success elsewhere and wasn't that highly regarded for either his game management or his player development. Their guards were pretty weak. Freddie Lewis a below average PG, not much of a distributor and only an average shooter and defender, while their 2 guards changed regularly and were unimpressive. Roger Brown at SF was a nice scorer with good range, great handles, and enough variety that his nickname was "the man of a thousand moves." He was definitely a key factor but he didn't play much defense or add much rebounding or playmaking. The PF were Bob Netolicky (the self proclaimed Joe Namath of the ABA) who was another excellent scorer and decent rebounder with no interest in defense then they replaced him with George McGinnis, another volume scorer (less efficient) and a great rebounder who generated a lot of assists, and turnovers. But for me, looking at this franchise's success, it was all built around Mel Daniels in the middle. A good scorer (consistently close to 20 a game on above average efficiency), great rebounder (usually among top in league), and powerful defender (better positionally than in help defense) who set the tone of the team and acted as their enforcer. His career was short and corresponds almost exactly with the rise and fall of the Pacers as a force in the ABA (his rookie year, he apparently shot a lot of long jump shots and had poor efficiency for Minnesota, which Leonard immediately banned when he came to Indiana).


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 or, to use dhsilv2's comp, Moses Malone (without the longevity of course). 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 contending with Unseld/Cowens for the rebounding leaderboard and 2nd team All-Defense with good scoring (but poor playmaking). 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, Chet Walker for the 60s/70s. Most of the 80s/90s guys are already in with someone like Dennis Johnson possibly having a shot. In the 00s, Elton Brand, by the numbers, looks very impressive while Amare Stoudamire has the most accolades and really impressive prime numbers . . . but didn't play any defense. 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.

Why not Trex's candidate Carmelo Anthony? At the same position, I'd take Chet Walker over Carmelo. He scored less, but part of that was more of a commitment to team first play both in Philly and later in Chicago. Walker was a bit less efficient in the regular season (in a less efficient league), more efficient in the playoffs. He played excellent defense, I was actually surprised that Bob Love got an All-D award instead of Walker in Chicago. Rebounded a bit less, better passer with better handles (relative to the rules of his day). Slightly less longevity, but in a period where you had to attend 4 years of college and the medical support was appreciably worse.

What it comes down to is that I'd rather have the guy that does what Trex suggests Carmelo MIGHT have been able to do in the right situation; play good defense and score efficiently while contributing both to lead a consistent playoff offense (in Chicago) and contribute selflessly to an all-time great ensemble title team (67 Sixers).

[trex_8063]

1st vote: Carmelo Anthony
(edited)
An impact study of Melo is a little bit of a mixed bag (skewing toward "lower than expected": just so we don't embark on another semantic debate with my labeling ). His RAPM's (the impact metric I tend to put the most faith in, fwiw) look a bit questionable [that is: below expectation] in many years. otoh, WOWY studies, and team performance relative to cast, don't look too bad at all for a player gaining traction in the mid 80's section of the list (better in these regards than Elton Brand, as noted in previous thread).

But as I've said elsewhere, I'm not comfortable putting all my eggs into one basket (and certainly not all into one that isn't a direct measure of "player goodness"). If one were to base ranking/assessment on all other factors and metrics (outside of the impact umbrella), he may conclude we're already 10+ places late on Carmelo Anthony.
With that in mind, I've a hard time putting him off any further.

Offensively he was clearly a superstar or near-superstar level player. Ranged from a very good to elite/near-elite scorer during his prime (despite spending much of that without terribly relevant play-makers around him). I've never been overly fond of his shot-selection (over-reliance on the mid-range), though that's merely what has kept him from being a consistently "elite" scorer. And in his defense, he does seem to end up taking a lot of dwindling shot-clock bail-out shots when the [often very flawed] offense has failed to generate a solid shot opportunity.

Not a particularly relevant playmaker, though no worse than James Worthy, Dominique Wilkins, or Kawhi Leonard. And he's been a very good rebounding SF (occ. SF/PF) in his career, and also provides some spacing.

A mostly weak defender with sporadic seasons of passable defense. I think most of us would agree that if he played consistently passable defense (I'm not talking good, merely passable), that he'd like have been voted by now (perhaps 10-20 places ago). pandrade83 noted something wrt Melo's defensive intensity on nationally televised games which perhaps speaks to something I've suspected about him (among other "offensive stars"): that Melo could play respectable defense if motivated to do so; perhaps if developed as a young player and deployed in a more offensively limited role-player capacity (as reported he was willing to do in the Olympics, fwiw) with defense being more of a primary focus. I find this of potential relevance as defense is generally the thing weighing down his impact metrics, and noting that impact is a combination of player quality, fit, and utilization. That he could perhaps play much better defense if motivated to do so and given less offensive responsibility is an intriguing thought to me, given players like Tony Allen or Andre Roberson are NOT capable of being good offensive players (motivated or not).

Longevity is actually pretty good by this point (substantially better than Webber, Kawhi, or Tiny; considering minutes, arguably better than Rodman, too).

He's criticized as being difficult to integrate into a contender (fwiw somewhat speculative, imo; difficult to imagine him being the BEST player on a solid contender, that I'd agree with), but at any rate a pretty decent floor-raiser (which carries more value [to me] than most seem to give it credit for).


2nd vote: Elton Brand
OK defensive player (perhaps a few seasons skewing toward "good") who rebounded very well, could put points on the board, and not a bad passing big. Solid prime numbers, and I'd consider his '06 peak to likely be among the top 40 of all-time (though seemingly a marginal outlier for him).
He's easily got the "statistical clout" to be competitive here. The big thing that's been holding him back for me (as stated previously) are questions regarding how much lift he actually provided [some/most years, anyway]. RAPM paints him as slightly more impactful than Anthony, however we don't really see this reflected in major improvements in the teams he played for. Granted this was just first and second-year Brand, but the Bulls were actually a slightly better version of terrible in the years that provide the bookends around his stint in Chicago. The Clippers show only modest improvement with him in his first season with them (same cast as the previous year otherwise), and then the following year regress to slightly worse than they'd been without Brand (without any roster losses). Few roster changes (arguably a small net loss) the following year, and they're still slightly worse than the year prior to obtaining Brand (possibly noteworthy that they did a little better in the 13 games Brand missed than the 69 he played in, though I haven't looked at coinciding injuries or SRS splits).

At this^^^ point Brand's been in the league five years, is solidly in his prime, and we've yet to see any indication of relevant lift to the teams he's played for. That's a concern for me.

The Clips do improve over the next couple years peaking in '06 (coincides with Brand's peak), though seems to coincide with them shoring up their backcourt (+/- Kaman improving) as much as anything. But then they immediately regress to mediocrity again the following year (coinciding with age/injury-related decline of Sam Cassell in '07; Brand still perfectly healthy and only 27 years old that year, no relevant roster losses). They do seem to fall off a cliff in '08 with Brand injured (though there were relevant injuries to Cassell and Kaman as well, fwiw).

Similar spotty indication of relevant lift when he moves on to Philly, too.
I know his RAPM's look sound ("star-level", if not quite superstar level); but I have to wonder if he somehow inadvertently nurtures a culture of dependency or over-reliance.......such that casts who might otherwise learn to fend for themselves if forced to live without him, don't play effectively with him===>this would account for solid on/off and RAPM numbers while NOT seeing an associated team lift.

I know this is an awful lot of negativity while ironically casting a vote for him. I expounded on this because Brand has a super-impressive statistical resume. Looking at that alone, we'd likely have to conclude we're late on him. It's the above concerns that he doesn't actually provide much lift that is the reason I've been reluctant to support him until now.

[penbeast0]

Brand also had a defensive rep that was appreciably better than "OK...perhaps a few seasons skewing toward good." Other than being a Clipper, the main rap I remember about him is that he was injured a lot which is why he didn't come to mind before Owly brought him up when I was thinking of all the Larry Nance/James Worthy types who were very good for a long time without being great. I don't consider him the type of impact player that Mel Daniels was, but he was a lot healthier than I remember and IF his defense was actually pretty mediocre, then I would rate Chet Walker, Bill Sharman, and possibly Marc Gasol or Dennis Johnson higher despite the stats.

Like most of us, I rarely watched the Sterling era Clippers in his prime. To quote Casablanca . . .

Peter Lorre: "You despise me, don't you Rick."

Humphrey Bogart: "If I gave you any thought, I probably would."

[trex_8063]

Brand also had a defensive rep that was appreciably better than "OK...perhaps a few seasons skewing toward good." Other than being a Clipper, the main rap I remember about him is that he was injured a lot which is why he didn't come to mind before Owly brought him up when I was thinking of all the Larry Nance/James Worthy types who were very good for a long time without being great. I don't consider him the type of impact player that Mel Daniels was, but he was a lot healthier than I remember and IF his defense was actually pretty mediocre, then I would rate Chet Walker, Bill Sharman, and possibly Marc Gasol or Dennis Johnson higher despite the stats.

Brand got some defensive rebounds (I honestly don't remember if he "chased" or if he erred toward boxing out), and has a decent shot-block rate. Though again he doesn't seem to shift the needle terribly far on the opp eFG% or team DREB% (or team DRtg in general). I don't remember him being a good pnr defender (not saying bad, just don't remember it being noteworthy at all), nor exceptionally aware from a team defense/rotations/etc standpoint (at least not on a consistent season-to-season basis).

Semantic clarification: by "OK, skewing toward good some years" to mean "average for his position with a few years above average". Maybe that undersells him, but I'll wager not by much.
Mediocre, to me, is a term that means "average to skewing toward a little below average"; to quote merriam-websters def, it refers to "moderate to low quality".

Like most of us, I rarely watched the Sterling era Clippers in his prime. To quote Casablanca . . .

Peter Lorre: "You despise me, don't you Rick."

Humphrey Bogart: "If I gave you any thought, I probably would."

Ooo, you've touched on one of my all-time fav movies.

[trex_8063]

Just wanna get an idea of who other people are thinking of, so......outside of the two players who will receive/have received your votes, who else are you thinking of at this stage?

For me, my top HM's are Terry Porter, Jack Sikma, Maurice Cheeks, Kawhi Leonard, and Chet Walker.--->I'd be happy with any one of these guys for the present spot, actually.
Not far behind them I'd mention guys like Walt Bellamy, Dave DeBusschere, Tim Hardaway, Shawn Kemp, Joe Dumars, George McGinnis, or Marques Johnson (to name just a handful).

[Outside]

Just wanna get an idea of who other people are thinking of, so......outside of the two players who will receive/have received your votes, who else are you thinking of at this stage?

For me, my top HM's are Terry Porter, Jack Sikma, Maurice Cheeks, Kawhi Leonard, and Chet Walker.--->I'd be happy with any one of these guys for the present spot, actually.
Not far behind them I'd mention guys like Walt Bellamy, Dave DeBusschere, Tim Hardaway, Shawn Kemp, Joe Dumars, George McGinnis, or Marques Johnson (to name just a handful).

I was about to do the same thing, throw some names out there as we get down toward the end.

Other names I think are worth a look...

Bernard King
Jerry Lucas
Billy Cunningham
Lou Hudson
Dennis Johnson
Jamaal Wilkes

Need to think about more recent guys as well

[penbeast0]

Ooooh, Cunningham may be an even better choice than Chet Walker (though Walker started ahead of a very young Billy C) . . . I had thought he was in. I'll have to run some numbers on the two of them to see if the numbers match my preconceptions.

Mixed bag. Walker is reasonably efficient for his era, appreciably more so than Cunningham. Cunningham is appreciably better rebounder and playmaker. From my memory, Walker was a better man defender on the wing, Cunningham more versatile. Walker's combination of better longevity and efficiency still probably has him a bit higher as a supporting player but Cunningham is more of a do it all guy you can build around as a 1st option despite the shaky efficiency. Sticking with Walker of the two for the moment.

Lucas is a good comp for Carmelo. Both are mediocre defenders (to be nice) who in circumstances where they didn't have to focus on offense got a good defensive rep (Carmelo in Olympics, Lucas in New York). Lucas has better range and much better rebounding, probably better playmaking, more efficient for his era too. Carmelo is more of a 1st option; Lucas was never more than a second option in Cincinnati. Add Lucas to the list of players I think should be in ahead of Carmelo Anthony as well.

[trex_8063]

Ooooh, Cunningham may be an even better choice than Chet Walker (though Walker started ahead of a very young Billy C) . . . I had thought he was in. I'll have to run some numbers on the two of them to see if the numbers match my preconceptions.

Walker's longevity edge is a pinch too much for me (even if we were to agree that Cunningham peaked a little higher). But then I like meaningful longevity.....

[trex_8063]

Just wanna get an idea of who other people are thinking of, so......outside of the two players who will receive/have received your votes, who else are you thinking of at this stage?

For me, my top HM's are Terry Porter, Jack Sikma, Maurice Cheeks, Kawhi Leonard, and Chet Walker.--->I'd be happy with any one of these guys for the present spot, actually.
Not far behind them I'd mention guys like Walt Bellamy, Dave DeBusschere, Tim Hardaway, Shawn Kemp, Joe Dumars, George McGinnis, or Marques Johnson (to name just a handful).

I was about to do the same thing, throw some names out there as we get down toward the end.

Other names I think are worth a look...

Bernard King
Jerry Lucas
Billy Cunningham
Lou Hudson
Dennis Johnson
Jamaal Wilkes

I almost mentioned Lucas and DJ, too (as they're definitely in the vicinity); Cunningham somewhat close too, for that matter.

Bernard King I tend to think of as historically overrated (longevity just too insignificant for me, personally).
Hudson too I just don't really have on my radar.
With Wilkes, his numbers aren't too transcendent (even for this stage) and his longevity only so-so; he has a decent/good defensive reputation, but someone would have to convince that he was basically Shawn Marion's equal on defense for me to give him serious top 100 consideration.

[Outside]

Just wanna get an idea of who other people are thinking of, so......outside of the two players who will receive/have received your votes, who else are you thinking of at this stage?

For me, my top HM's are Terry Porter, Jack Sikma, Maurice Cheeks, Kawhi Leonard, and Chet Walker.--->I'd be happy with any one of these guys for the present spot, actually.
Not far behind them I'd mention guys like Walt Bellamy, Dave DeBusschere, Tim Hardaway, Shawn Kemp, Joe Dumars, George McGinnis, or Marques Johnson (to name just a handful).

I was about to do the same thing, throw some names out there as we get down toward the end.

Other names I think are worth a look...

Bernard King
Jerry Lucas
Billy Cunningham
Lou Hudson
Dennis Johnson
Jamaal Wilkes

I almost mentioned Lucas and DJ, too (as they're definitely in the vicinity); Cunningham somewhat close too, for that matter.

Bernard King I tend to think of as historically overrated (longevity just too insignificant for me, personally).
Hudson too I just don't really have on my radar.
With Wilkes, his numbers aren't too transcendent (even for this stage) and his longevity only so-so; he has a decent/good defensive reputation, but someone would have to convince that he was basically Shawn Marion's equal on defense for me to give him serious top 100 consideration.

Those are fair comments. All of these guys are borderline, which means they could make it or miss out.

Lucas was a good scorer, very good rebounder, and the best floor-spacing big man of his era, but his resume pretty much ends there. He wasn't a playmaker, and he definitely wasn't a defender.

Dennis Johnson's numbers don't jump out at you, but he was a good defender and does well in intangibles.

Cunningham has poor longevity, but his numbers are pretty good. Of the ones I mentioned, he seems like the guy with the best chance to get in.

Some thoughts about the guys you mentioned...

Terry Porter - I really liked Porter. Such a solid, steady guy to have running your offense. Decent longevity compared to many other guys in this range. His numbers don't jump off the page.

Jack Sikma - good longevity, pretty good numbers. He's in the mix for me.

Maurice Cheeks - my favorite player from those Philly teams. Like Porter, a solid, steady point guard. Like Porter, not sure that he has the numbers.

Kawhi Leonard - seems premature for me. Only 400 games, and it's not like he came into the league fully formed.

Chet Walker - I like me some Chet. I'm considering him for this spot.

Walt Bellamy - another guy from the 60s who doesn't get proper attention because he's in the tier below the acknowledged greats. Considering him for this spot.

Dave DeBusschere - DeBusschere and Bradley are thought of as a pair, but I always considered DeBusschere the better of the two. A little light on the longevity, but he produced year after year.

Tim Hardaway - has been discussed by better folks than me.

Shawn Kemp - what he became after he left Seattle really bothers me. He seemed like he was on his way to becoming one of the all-time greats, then he signed a big contract and got fat.

Joe Dumars - easily my favorite player on those Piston teams. Like Worthy, came up big on the big stage. Excellent defender. Understated and underrated.

George McGinnis - I wasn't a fan of his game. Excelled in a weak ABA, and his numbers dropped when he joined the NBA. Not great longevity.

Marques Johnson - does he have enough to overcome the longevity issue?

[pandrade83]

Primary: Tim Hardaway
Alternate: Mookie Blaylock

I think the lack of love for Hardaway has gotten out of control. It's been a few threads since I posted my original argument, so I've reposted it with some additions/updates - he's in fairly unique territory at this point.

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
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


Of that group, ONLY Hardaway 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 to the tune of +15 for Miami & -8 for the Warriors.

-Miami would have its best year by SRS in '97 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.

3. Hardaway has a shaky playoff resume that saw him lose 4 times with HCA. Hardaway has a roller-coaster of a playoff resume - there's more valleys than peaks but there are a couple nice moments in key playoff victories (vs. '91 Spurs & vs. '97 Knicks).
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.

Watch on YouTube

'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.

Watch on YouTube

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From a regular season standpoint, Blaylock should have gone in some time ago - everything we know about impact loves him - both from a box score & RAPM standpoint.

In the Box Score

-Blaylock leads a pair of 55 W+ Atlanta teams in WS, VORP & PER - PLUS he leads two more playoff teams in all of those metrics in both '95 & '96
-He finishes Top 10 in VORP an impressive 5 times and is Top 10 in DWS (very hard for a guard to do) 4 times.
-He has a pair of double digit WS years to his name including a relatively high peak of 12.5 in '97; this peak is higher than anything Carmelo Anthony achieved, for example.

Impact
-NPI RAPM grades him as a Top 10 player the first two years we have data - it's likely that it would have seen him as having a comparable impact in '94-'96 as well based on how his metrics in the other years stack up.
-Even in '99 - when Blaylock is exiting his prime, RAPM still views him as a decisively high impact player in a wonky season (lock-out - only 50 games - some sample size issues)
-In '98 when he misses 12 games, the Hawks go 44-26 with (52 win pace) & 6-6 without (41 win pace)

The two knocks on him are longevity - he has 72 career WS which isn't great at this juncture - & a lack of memorable playoff moments.

WRT longevity, he does have 5 outstanding seasons of play ('94-'98) where it's more likely than not his overall impact is that of an all-star with a 2nd team All-NBA caliber play. His post/pre-prime seasons are a little short on impact & the prime duration is relatively short.

On playoffs - he is poor in '93, '99 & '95 - suffering steep drop-offs all 3 years. Career playoff #"s of 47% TS on 14 PPG is not great - I don't want to come off as letting him off the hook here. He does have some strong defensive performances - one I'll highlight specifically is his performance on Jordan in the '97 2nd round. Jordan was held to 3 PPG less than his rs average on a fairly soft 51% TS. The video clip below shows aggressive & strong defense - both man to man & help throughout the series.

He generally maintains his stealing prowess, rebounding & passing in the playoffs - the biggest hit is to his scoring & offensive efficiency. Although the video I post below does highlight robust defensive impact, you will see a horrible shot attempt at the 14 second mark - and that's one of the things I remember about him - poor judgment on shooting . . . which may be exhibited in his personal life as he is serving a 5 year prison sentence.

At any rate - most players being elected at this stage have fairly steep playoff drop-offs, so I don't view it as comparatively damning, but it needs mentioned. I think if he played for a different franchise, he'd be in by now.

Here's my argument of why I take Blaylock over Cheeks if interested:

Spoiler:

1) Box metrics: Unless your arguing on career metrics, Blaylock actually has decisively better box metrics at their respective peaks. Blaylock posts a higher WS peak than Cheeks despite Cheeks having gotten the benefit of playing on a 65 win team. Blaylock also has 4 years equal or better than Cheeks' 3 best. Blaylock has 5 years with better BPM than Cheeks' peak & 4 years with better PER than Cheeks' peak. Blaylock's outstanding RAPM & defensive impact qualify this as a not Enes Kanter type situation.

2) From a team achievement perspective - Blaylock was the best player on a pair of teams that won > 55 games. At Cheeks' (arguable) peak in '86, I would not say that he was the best player on a team that won 54 games. You could also make the argument that Cheeks' peak was '83 - where he was the 3rd best player on a GOAT Caliber 65 win team - there's value in that to be sure - but I tend to view his peak as '86 - where he was lower on the pecking order on a team that had comparable success to Blaylock's two best years - where he was clearly the best player.

In short - for me - Blaylock's higher peak and stronger team success with him as the best player are what gives Blaylock a slight edge.

In addition to Blaylock & Hardaway, Cheeks & Porter are the two other point guards who I'd like to see get included on this project. I think all four are very close to one another and I put all four above Tiny - even though a credible case can be made that Tiny has the highest peak.

Watch on YouTube

[pandrade83]

Just wanna get an idea of who other people are thinking of, so......outside of the two players who will receive/have received your votes, who else are you thinking of at this stage?

For me, my top HM's are Terry Porter, Jack Sikma, Maurice Cheeks, Kawhi Leonard, and Chet Walker.--->I'd be happy with any one of these guys for the present spot, actually.
Not far behind them I'd mention guys like Walt Bellamy, Dave DeBusschere, Tim Hardaway, Shawn Kemp, Joe Dumars, George McGinnis, or Marques Johnson (to name just a handful).

Aside from guys I'm actively supporting (these are not necessarily in order), a list of players I'm considering as we get down the stretch.


Point Guards
Mo Cheeks: Excellent defender, +/- data from Philly days suggests high impact, efficient player, Never was the best player on a team that did anything at all, arguably the least threatening offensive player amongst quality PG's left, Philly's offensive efficiency #'s don't scream high impact, even though the +/- data does.

Terry Porter: #1 in WS amongst Point Guards left; probably has the weakest peak amongst any PG worth considering at this juncture though.

Wings/Forwards & Guards

Buck Williams: #1 in WS amongst post-merger players remaining implying excellent longevity, had a couple superb playoff runs early in his career ('84 stands out for me), but was the best player on New Jersey teams that lost 55+ 3 straight years including a 60 loss season.

Elton Brand: See other posters

Carmelo Anthony: See other debates

At least one of Walker/Cunningham/McGinnis: I need to be better informed here & am looking forward to reading some of the discussions on these players. I think at least one needs to get in - not sure which one to advocate for first.

Era concerns plague all of them for me - in totality professional basketball had nearly as many teams as today with a much weaker talent pool.

Mcginnis seems to be the most dynamic of the trio, but has the worst meaningful longevity & his turnover level makes me think he was careless and/or irresponsible with the ball.

I wish Walker was a better rebounder and/or passer - but he was the best player of some impressive Chicago teams - particularly the '72 squad He was also, along with Greer & Cunningham, leaders of a strong post-Wilt Philly team & was a key contributor to a GOAT Caliber Sixer team (like Cunningham).

Cunningham brought a lot to the table (dynamic scoring, good playmaker, good rebounder, appears to have been a capable defender - has a year of steals data with > 200 steals) but also takes a bit off with high turnovers & some sub-par shooting years as well as a lot of fouls. I'm impressed that he was able to win an ABA MVP when the league was roughly on par with the NBA & like that he was able to take a Kentucky team led by Gilmore & Issel to 7.





Centers
Vlade Divac: #1 in Career VORP amongst all remaining players, best player on a team that did win a playoff series ('95 Lakers) - which is not something that every player being discussed can say, added value at all stops - not too many standout years.

Bill Walton: Unparalleled peak amongst those left, unparalleled longevity too

Zelmo Beaty: Sorry, Pen. He's the ABA Center I'm taking. We know he was able to have success pre-ABA and his career was trending upward, and while that '71 season is an outlier relative to the rest of his career, it's still a better season than Daniels was ever able to achieve. Given the lack of medical training in the era, I wonder if having a year off did his body good.

Amare: I know he's weak defensively, but his offensive power is pretty remarkable at this stage - other than Hardaway, the only other player to achieve 5 X all-NBA with at least one first team appearance.

Sikma: Strong floor spacer, passer & rebounder - not as strong of a defensive presence, but worthwhile nonetheless.

Bellamy: Simmons crucified him in his book, but he is the Top WS guy left, so he needs a look.

[dhsilv2]

Posting later, but I'll be taking brand.

From there I'm looking at Hardaway, Tiny, Melo, Mookie, and honestly hoping someone has a better idea. Not huge on chet. Cheeks I think has to come after mookie. I'd need to see a case for Porter.

[trex_8063]

Those are fair comments. All of these guys are borderline, which means they could make it or miss out.

Lucas was a good scorer, very good rebounder, and the best floor-spacing big man of his era, but his resume pretty much ends there. He wasn't a playmaker, and he definitely wasn't a defender.

I think it was Samurai [one of the few posters on this forum who's old enough to have watched a lot of 60s/70s era players during their careers] who once commented that Lucas appeared a really sharp passer who just didn't accrue a lot of assists (perhaps similar to someone like Kevin Love???).
Otherwise spot-on assessment.
His jump-shot was so weird in that he actually kinda jumps backward as he elevates (sort of similar to Blake Griffin's jump-shot); but he sure was a heck of a good shooter. He's another borderline or fringe top 100 player to me: I could see including him, or I could see leaving just on the outside looking in.
fwiw, Elgee's regressed WOWY scores didn't rate him too impressively.

Dennis Johnson's numbers don't jump out at you, but he was a good defender and does well in intangibles.

Agree. I'd anecdotally read a few passages of him clashing with teammates/franchises (I think mostly while in PHX). But generally he seems to make teams better and was an integral cog in multiple contender/champs or otherwise good teams through his entire career.
fwiw, Larry Bird is almost effusive in his praise of Dennis Johnson. idk, that could just be Bird playing favorites, but on the other hand, maybe that says a lot (I mean, it's not as though Bird didn't play with other "praise-worthy" teammates).

Terry Porter - I really liked Porter. Such a solid, steady guy to have running your offense. Decent longevity compared to many other guys in this range. His numbers don't jump off the page.

I think his numbers in the early 90's sort of jump off the page. Look at '90 and '91 combined, in particular: 20.8 PER, .218 WS/48, +5.2 BPM, and +19 efficiency differential in 33.8 mpg. In standard box numbers, that was 17.3 ppg @ 61.4% TS, with 8.5 apg and only 2.7 topg......that's not too far off of what prime Chris Paul was doing (though CP3 was better defender and rebounder). Porter was a passable defender, too, had a fairly quick release on his shot, well ahead of his time as a 3pt shooter, and with a big enough frame to back smaller PG's down in the post.

Jack Sikma - good longevity, pretty good numbers. He's in the mix for me.

Good defensive reputation, too.

Maurice Cheeks - my favorite player from those Philly teams. Like Porter, a solid, steady point guard. Like Porter, not sure that he has the numbers.

Marginally lesser scorer with less shooting range; pretty outstanding FG% though (good finisher despite his size---->really an underrated athlete) and good hitting open mid-range looks. Pretty good playmaker with excellent turnover economy, and imo on the short-list of all-time great defensive PG's.

Kawhi Leonard - seems premature for me. Only 400 games, and it's not like he came into the league fully formed.

True, though he was a "solid" role player right off the bat, and a borderline All-Star level player by his second season; and his last three seasons have been very impressive. I still hear you on the longevity thing, but he's done enough [imo] that he's the one SHORT career guy who I think belongs somewhere in the top 100.

Chet Walker - I like me some Chet. I'm considering him for this spot.

Well, I've already cast my ballots and probably won't switch at this point, but.....yeah. Solid candidate for here; a career that frequently gets overlooked, I would say.

Dave DeBusschere - DeBusschere and Bradley are thought of as a pair, but I always considered DeBusschere the better of the two. A little light on the longevity, but he produced year after year.

I think definitely DeBusschere was the better of the two. His numbers don't wow, granted. I think he probably shot from the outside a little too willingly, though fwiw as PF/combo forward that did provide some spacing effect; he was actually capable of shooting ~20-footers quickly while curling off a screen (and I can easily seeing him scale his range up for the 3pt era, fwiw). Solid rebounder and one of the best (and most versatile) defensive forwards of his generation. I more or less see him like Draymond Green without the passing/playmaking ability (but with better longevity at this point). His longevity really isn't too bad given he played >34 mpg in ALL of his final 10 seasons, without any major injury in that span, nor any major fluctuations in his performance.

Bellamy - The ding on him is definitely his defense, and similar to Brand people can raise questions about how much lift he provides.

Shawn Kemp - what he became after he left Seattle really bothers me. He seemed like he was on his way to becoming one of the all-time greats, then he signed a big contract and got fat.

There was a post someone [sorry i can't remember who it was or where it was posted] who sort of painted Kemp in a sympathetic light, elaborating on how Seattle sort of "mis-managed" him, and how Jim McIlvaine was getting paid like 3x as much as Kemp, etc......basically how this kind of thing made Kemp cynical such that when he finally got his contract he was sort of like "F U" to everyone, perhaps feeling like he'd already earned those big dollars while playing for substantially less than he was worth. I'm just paraphrasing, it was pretty well-written.
Not trying to condone what happened to him (especially because I believe drugs became part of the problem at some point); just putting that out there, as it perhaps makes it a bit more understandable.

George McGinnis - I wasn't a fan of his game. Excelled in a weak ABA, and his numbers dropped when he joined the NBA. Not great longevity.

I have to admit the only bit I've actually watched of George McGinnis is from the '77 Finals. He doesn't exactly receive a lot of flattery from those who watched more substantial amounts of him.
He scored a moderate-high volume on mostly mediocre shooting efficiency. His rebounding rates (especially on the offensive glass) are VERY impressive for a PF (even during his NBA career). His assist rates also get very impressive for a PF by late in his career.
He's criticised by penbeast0 (among others??) for being a weak defensive forward (which I didn't see anything in the '77 Finals to refute that), though to his credit he does have some fairly high steal rates.
Biggest strike against him, imo, are his massive turnover rates.
And yes, his longevity isn't great.
Nonetheless, I feel he's got enough in his career value to be a fringe candidate (that is: could make the list, though wouldn't be a crime if he missed out).

Marques Johnson - does he have enough to overcome the longevity issue?

It's a fair question. He's another fringe candidate, imo. I currently have him in the 95-100 range, though it's only recently that I decided to shift him up there (he's previously been around 105).

[Clyde Frazier]

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

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
James Worthy 28.5
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
Dennis Rodman 89.8
Alonzo Mourning 89.7
Bob McAdoo 89.1
Dave Cowens 86.3
Chris Webber 84.7
James Worthy 81.2

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):

Watch on YouTube

I then look at someone like dominique, who was voted in at #62, and I think a 25 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 25 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:

Watch on YouTube

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:

Watch on YouTube

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.

As for defense, the last few seasons specifically he hasn’t been the same player physically. I’ve never claimed him to be a plus defender, even in his prime. I’m now reminded of some data i gathered in the 2014 project that i haven’t added here:

While not perfect, take a look at how the below SFs have performed against carmelo vs. their career averages. Sure, camrelo may not have been guarding them the whole time, but it's a large enough sample size to at least uncover any red flags.

(TS% or eFG% not available for head to head data)

Durant - 27.9 PPG on 43/41/87 (career 27.3 PPG on 48/38/88)

LeBron - 25.9 PPG on 49/27/70 (career 27.4 PPG on 50/34/75)

Gay - 18.6 PPG on 44/22/72 (career 18.4 PPG on 45/34/79)

George - 15.1 PPG on 45/34/77 (career 15.3 PPG on 43/36/83)

Pierce - 23.1 PPG on 50/41/80 (career 20.9 PPG on 45/37/81)

Granger - 16.6 PPG on 45/39/88 (career 16.8 PPG on 43/38/85)

Caron Butler - 12.4 PPG on 43/38/84 (career 14.5 PPG on 43/34/85)

McGrady - 19.6 PPG on 45/44/82 (career 19.6 PPG on 44/34/75)

Deng - 17.1 PPG on 45/36/83 (career 16.9 PPG on 46/33/77)

Josh Howard - 12.7 PPG on 44/31/79 (career 14.3 PPG on 45/33/77)

Richard Jefferson - 14.2 PPG on 51/43/66 (career 14 PPG on 47/38/77)

Stephen Jackson - 17.4 PPG on 35/33/86 (career 15.1 PPG on 41/33/80)

Of the 12 players, 6 scored the same or less than their career averages against carmelo. Those that scored more were only by marginal amounts. Efficiency ranges from lower to somewhat higher. No red flags here.

That’s 11 seasons of data. It doesn’t paint the picture of an egregious defender.

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.

[trex_8063]

Thru post #16:

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


About 21 hours until runoff on this one.

Spoiler:

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

[trex_8063]

Thru post #16:

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


About 21 hours until runoff on this one.

Spoiler:

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

I'll give this one more hour to hopefully get at least one more vote that will enable us to narrow down to a proper runoff, otherwise we'll have to enter a 3-way runoff with the above three.

[Outside]

Vote: Carmelo Anthony

I'm going with Carmelo due to his pluses outweighing his negatives a bit better than the other candidates being considered at this point.

Scoring -- he's a solid scorer, averaging at least 20 PPG every season until this one.

Efficiency -- his shooting efficiency is decent for a volume scorer, and he has a low usage rate compared to his high usage peers.

Rebounding -- he was a good rebounder during his prime.

Defense -- doesn't rate well as a defender, though I think he was a decent post defender in his prime.

Playmaking -- not a relevant playmaker.

Longevity -- has has good RS longevity.

PS -- he doesn't have near enough decent playoff runs for my liking, making it out of the first round only twice, though he has good PS production. He was never on teams good enough to be championship contenders.

Overall, this seems like a good place for him to land.

[SactoKingsFan]

I'll go with Elton Brand for my primary vote. Very good two way big with one of the top remaining peaks, impressive prime box score metrics and solid longevity.

Alt: Terry Porter


Sent from my Essential PH-1 using Tapatalk