RealGM Top 100 List #22

[RSCD3_]

I'm voting Ewing

he has the best combo of longevity and two way ability

Compared to other centers left

Ewing played tougher competition and was the more valuable defensive player. He also has better longevity.

Ewing was a better offensive player than dikembe who didn't have many years impacting the offense and carrying the load as much as Ewing did.

Dwight Howard was close to Ewing as an offensive and defensive player but he lacks the longevity

I know we are in a run off I just wanted to state why I like Ewing the most career wise

I also believe two way bigs are more impactful than guards with defensive reputation unless they are also very good on offense



Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[DQuinn1575]

Here is a small pro-con article about Mikan I typed up from a book I own.

Pro Mikan
-Led the league in scoring 6 times.
-The only time the Lakers missed winning a title in his seven year career was in 1951 when he broke a bone in his ankle.
-The widening of the FT circle to 12 feet was aimed primarily at Mikan.
-His best pro game was in 1952 against Rochester. He scored 61pts on 22FG (reminds me of Shaqs career high).

MVP voting
Mikan would have won 4 MVP if they gave out the award during his entire career (1950-53).

So Mikan would have won four MVP's while winning 4 out of 5 titles from 50-54 while leading the league in scoring each year.
That is extreme era dominance.

Anti Mikan
The 24-Second clock and the demise of Mikan & the Laker's.

Following the 1954 season the NBA adopted the 24 second clock thereby preventing the keep away strategy.
When the NBA added the clock Mikan was only 30 years old but he retired. His ponderous nature in getting up and down the court was outmoded. Mikan accepted a new role as GM (you didn't think Jordan was the first did you?).
After the 1956 Laker's lost 15 out of their first 20 games Mikan made a bold move by getting back into shape and activating himself as a player. He averaged 10.5ppg in 37 games in his return.

Is it fair to punish Mikan because the game was less popular when he played?
Did Mikan have the physical capabilities to go up against Chamberlain, Shaq or Russell? Of course not.
Did Mikan have the size & athletic ability of a Robinson? Of course not.

Lakers pace 1953 90.1
Lakers pace 2012 90.5

The 24 second clock was instituted because teams stalled AGAINST the lakers. Mikan was playing a game about as fast as current day.

He was 6-10 245






Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[ThaRegul8r]

Here's a question for the Mikan supporters. If Wade is getting crushed for his durability/longevity, then why is Mikan getting a pass when it comes to his lack of longevity?

I was actually thinking about that after I copied and posted from my notes on Mikan into my GOAT list thread to ponder over. In the last Top 100 Project I said this about LeBron James:

Re: LeBron. I find it difficult to rank an active player all-time when his career is still a work in progress, and he hasn’t even played 10 years yet. With players such as Kobe and Duncan, we’ve already seen their prime, and so all-time rankings can be done since we’ve already seen their best. Dirk has put 13 seasons in, so people can start to think about where he should rank. But speaking for myself, I can’t rank someone who doesn’t even have a decade of work yet.

If I don't even begin to consider active players in a historical sense until they have a decade's worth of work under their belt, it would be hypocritical of me to disregard this for a player who has less than a decade's worth of work total. Since I myself have talked about consistency, I can't very well be inconsistent since, as I said, the same criteria must be applied across the board and not just when it suits one to do so. In that, I am no different from anyone else and no exceptions are to be made for me.

This is exactly the same thing as the peak vs. longevity debate. Speaking for myself, I'd have to rank players who helped bring their teams consistent success over a longer period of time than Mikan's brief career ahead, yet the counterargument could be that Mikan did more to help his teams win over the short period of time he played than other players have who played for a longer period of time. I have to decide where that line is. He helped his teams with seven championships in eight seasons including the Chicago American Gears in the NBL in 1947, one with the Lakers in the NBL in 1948, one with the Lakers in the BAA in 1949, and four with the Lakers in the NBA in 1950, and ’52–’54. The one year they didn't win, he was injured. So Mikan has forced me to consider how important longevity is to me again. That's really the big thing that's making ranking Mikan problematic for me.

[ThaRegul8r]

The 24 second clock was instituted because teams stalled AGAINST the lakers.

This is true. In fact, the lowest-scoring game in NBA history was a 19-18 game in which the Lakers were the losing side.

The 24-second clock came in because of a Lakers–Fort Wayne game, which ended in a score of 19–18. We had played them the night before in Fort Wayne and just beat the devil out of them. We all got on the train, came to Minneapolis, to play them again. They had a coach named Mendenhall, and he just decided he wasn’t going to try to run with us. So he just held the ball. We were leading the whole game till the last second and Larry Foust beat us; bless his soul, he died of cancer. Anyway, we get the rebound on a shot, but it slipped out of a guy’s hand. There were three seconds left and Larry shot it. Made some kind of hook shot and rolled in off the top. Beat us 19–18. But during the game the fans were leaving. They wanted their money back. It was boring to watch a team sitting on the ball. People were reading their newspapers. They had to do something, ’cause if you’re gonna hold the ball like that, you won’t have any fans. They want to see you play. The guy from Syracuse, Danny Biasone, finally came up with a remedy which was tremendous for basketball. We had tried a lot of different things during the early years. Tried in the last two minutes if you made over two fouls to give the ball black. You got your choice, you could take it or give it over. It was just bad until they came up with the 24-second clock.

It's actually a point in favor of Mikan's dominance, that teams went to such extremes in order to beat the team he led.

[Basketballefan]

Like Durant, I need a few more seasons from Wade to move him up and I likely will then. I don't have time at the moment to post it or elaborate as much as I'd like, but I believe Wade's teams were worse than Ewing when both had to do without all-star and other team support.

I'll be voting for Ewing again.

He was a dominant defensive anchor and part of the collective team effort/coaching to lead the arguably the greatest modern defense ever. He had offensive abilities and had to shoulder the load for an anemic offensive Knick team. I think he had the strongest two way impact with some of the toughest competition.

Seems odd to me that more seasons from Wade would make any significant difference. Barring a dramatic and unexpected turn of events, Wade's not going to be adding much value to his career from here on out. He was far the level of a superstar last season.

Explain to me how Wade can't add much career value from here on out. Unless you are assuming that Wade is going to be a 15 4 4 type player next year, then i don't see why you would think this. Apart from Wade's garbage finals he was an efficient 19 5 5 in the reg season and had similar playoff numbers. Also, Wade has gotten into shape over the offseason so i don't think he will be worse than he was last year. If Wade can put up a few more 20 5 5 type seasons it will certainly add some value.

[ThaRegul8r]

I noticed mikan didn't make the 2011 list. I'm assuming pre-shot clock era players weren't considered for that one?

Going by memory, I believe they were excluded as no one wanted to be bothered with attempting to rank them, though I'll check to make certain.

[trex_8063]

I noticed mikan didn't make the 2011 list. I'm assuming pre-shot clock era players weren't considered for that one? Will be interesting to see where these other guys place (or if they place at all):

Ed Macauley
Neil Johnston
Dolph Schayes

I cannot imagine Dolph Schayes won't make the list (would even be surprised if he doesn't make the top 50). Neil Johnston should make the list imho, though I suppose it's conceivable that he won't. Ed Macauley.....I kinda doubt he does, though it's possible.

[ushvinder88]

George Mikan was at one point considered the goat and he dominated all black teams in exhibition games, the man was a dominant scorer and a winner. For people to simply dismiss him, just remember that the nba was still mostly a 'white' league from 1957-1963 and Bill Russell's offensive numbers werent even close to the numbers Mikan was putting up in that time frame. George was a dominant scorer, a winner and he's 6'10. If bob petit was a superstar in the 60's, I see no reason to believe Mikan wouldn't be.

George Mikan is like the Don Hutson of the NBA. We'll never know how good he actually is.

[Moonbeam]

Sorry I missed the main vote - it would have been for Frazier but it looks like it would not have had an impact on the final result.

As for Mikan vs. Ewing, it's a difficult call. Mikan may have only had five impact years of eligibility, but you can't really ask for bigger dominance over that span. Ewing was very good or great for quite a long time, but other than a few select seasons at the most, I don't think he was the best center in the league. I value peak more than longevity, but it's difficult to know how to assign a value to Mikan's massive peak x short career combination. lorak's work has helped to shed light on comparing the competition level, but I'm still unsure of my pick here. In case a deadline is approaching quickly, I'll go ahead and cast my vote for George Mikan, but I might easily change to Ewing. There is no doubt that Mikan was much more dominant in his era, and leading the Lakers to so many titles is hard to look past.

The Lakers' playoff records:

1949 (I know it doesn't count here): 8-2
1950: 11-2
1951: 3-4
1952: 9-4
1953: 9-3
1954: 9-4

[colts18]

Vote Ewing

Same reasons as the previous thread. Mikan's case is even worse than Pettit. Mikan didn't play against a black player. I question his impact because he played in a really weak league. How good would Ryan Anderson look in an all white league? He would look like a star when he had to face a lot of Scalabrines instead of Duncans.

[Basketballefan]

Wow i've used weak era against Mikan, but i think the race thing is a little unnecessary.

[Clyde Frazier]

Vote Ewing

Same reasons as the previous thread. Mikan's case is even worse than Pettit. Mikan didn't play against a black player. I question his impact because he played in a really weak league. How good would Ryan Anderson look in an all white league? He would look like a star when he had to face a lot of Scalabrines instead of Duncans.

I don't think this is a valid argument. Pointing to the infancy of the league and a smaller talent pool is fine. Attempting to make a modern day analogy based only on race is a complete exaggeration, though.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[colts18]

Wow i've used weak era against Mikan, but i think the race thing is a little unnecessary.

Race is absolutely a factor. Blacks were simply not allowed in the game in Mikan's era and had low penetration in the Pettit era. Blacks are 75% of the best players in the world today. If 75% of the best players disappeared, the league would become weak. Its a huge factor and ignoring it wont change the fact that Mikan played in an era of no blacks

[colts18]

A thought experiment.

Let's say the NBA outlawed anyone taller than 6-7. How would that change the game?

-Jerry West could be argued as the #2 player all-time after Michael Jordan
-Allen Iverson would be one of the GOAT's because of no rim protection
-Instead of being one of the best small players ever, Isiah Thomas is one of the best players ever

Lets say the NBA then allowed 6-7+ guys to play. Wouldn't you question the impact of the small guys who didn't play in an era of big men? The best players in history are disproportionately 6-7+ so you would have to downgrade the small guys who never played with big guys because the competition level was weak.

That's how I view the race issue in regards to George Mikan. He benefited from a weak talent pool playing against him. That's a mark on his legacy.

[Moonbeam]

A thought experiment.

Let's say the NBA outlawed anyone taller than 6-7. How would that change the game?

-Jerry West could be argued as the #2 player all-time after Michael Jordan
-Allen Iverson would be one of the GOAT's because of no rim protection
-Instead of being one of the best small players ever, Isiah Thomas is one of the best players ever

Lets say the NBA then allowed 6-7+ guys to play. Wouldn't you question the impact of the small guys who didn't play in an era of big men? The best players in history are disproportionately 6-7+ so you would have to downgrade the small guys who never played with big guys because the competition level was weak.

That's how I view the race issue in regards to George Mikan. He benefited from a weak talent pool playing against him. That's a mark on his legacy.

And that is part of why he wasn't voted in the first 10 (or even 5) slots. I don't think anyone would argue that Mikan's era was anything other than the weakest in history, but identifying how much weaker it was is not as cut and dry as you make it sound, in my opinion. lorak posted some research on WS/48 changes for pre-shot clock players that is worth considering.

[magicmerl]

Yeah, if we weren't adjusting for Era I don't see how Hakeem can be voted in ahead of him.

[Jim Naismith]

Wow i've used weak era against Mikan, but i think the race thing is a little unnecessary.

Race is absolutely a factor. Blacks were simply not allowed in the game in Mikan's era and had low penetration in the Pettit era. Blacks are 75% of the best players in the world today. If 75% of the best players disappeared, the league would become weak. Its a huge factor and ignoring it wont change the fact that Mikan played in an era of no blacks

Let's just consider race then. Here are some elite white big men:

Dave Cowens
Bill Walton
Larry Bird
Dirk Nowitzki
Kevin Love

The best white big men did (and still do) very well in a integrated league.

We should apply a segregation discount to Mikan's achievements. But nonetheless, it's likely that he would have done well in the hypothetically integrated NBA of the 1950s.

[colts18]

Some numbers on Mikan's league vs today's NBA.

Lets look at 1952 (first year where MP are tracked) and 2014 using WS/48

Standard deviation of WS/48 among players who played 500+ MP:
1952: 0.074
2014: 0.053

That means the talent in the league varied a lot which is a good indicator for weak lower end talent.

% of players with WS/48 that is negative:
1952: 8.9%
2014: 1.8%

A lot of negative players were playing in that era

% of players with WS/48 over .200:
1952: 8.9%
2014: 3.3%

A lot more players look great in 1954 simply because the lower end of the talent inflates the stats of the stars

% of players with WS/48 over .150:
1952: 20%
2014: 12.2%

Replacement level in the NBA is typically around .040 WS/48 (equivalent of 16 win NBA team).

% of players that are replacement level:
1952: 27%
2014: 13%

More than double the rate. A ton of replacement level players infected the 1952 NBA.

Mikan's WS/48 was 2.26 standard deviations above the league mean. In 2014, that would translate to a .220 WS/48 which is what James Harden put up last year as the 7th best player in the league. Kevin Durant's league leading WS/48 this season would translate to an absurd .374 WS/48 in 1954, by far the best in NBA history.

[Doctor MJ]

I noticed mikan didn't make the 2011 list. I'm assuming pre-shot clock era players weren't considered for that one? Will be interesting to see where these other guys place (or if they place at all):

Ed Macauley
Neil Johnston
Dolph Schayes

I cannot imagine Dolph Schayes won't make the list (would even be surprised if he doesn't make the top 50). Neil Johnston should make the list imho, though I suppose it's conceivable that he won't. Ed Macauley.....I kinda doubt he does, though it's possible.

So to confirm what others said, and add to it:

Mikan's made every Top 100 he was eligible for, and he's been in the 20s in previous lists.

Macauley never made a list
Johnston made one list (2008) in the 89th spot.
Schayes made every list somewhere between 60 & 90, though each time he's risen higher.

Of note: Paul Arizin has topped all of these guys ever time, and explaining why probably helps people understand more about Schayes.

Dolph Schayes was a 6 foot 7 guy weighing less than 200 pounds who played as a big man. His game was finesse with a set shot and his efficiency wasn't great.

Paul Arizin was a 6 foot 4 wingman who weighed as much as Schayes known for his jump shot and for racking up free throws (which lead to great efficiency relative to contemporaries at his best) along with tenacious defense.

So we're in this interesting position. They played in the same era and Schayes accomplished more, but it's hard to imagine draft Schayes over Arizin for later eras. Having a 6 foot 4 wingman who can drive & shoot while playing aggressive defense is basically still what you're hoping for. Having a 6 foot 7 finesse big hasn't made sense for decades.

[Jim Naismith]

Vote: George Mikan



It's no secret that I value era dominance, and he's the one undisputed #1 man left.

+ 5-time champion in 6 years (repeat, then a three-peat)

+ Mikan's sheer dominance led to 3 major rule changes:

* 24-second shot clock

* widening of the lane

* goal-tending violation

+ Career Playoff PER

1. Michael Jordan 28.60
2. George Mikan 28.51
3. LeBron James 27.70
4. Shaquille O'Neal 26.13
5. Hakeem Olajuwon 25.69

+ Mikan was voted by Associated Press as the Greatest Basketball Player of the first half-century