RealGM Top 100 #4

[ronnymac2]

Josh Howard was never an excellent player. He wasn't even as good as Luol Deng this year. That's not to say Dirk's support was bad, because they played solid defense, and I think Terry was very good back in 2006. But Josh Howard was NEVER a legit number two guy. Never.

Karl Malone was injured during the 2004 playoffs btw. There are numerous games on youtube. I recently watched L.A. vs. HOU game 1 and LA vs. Minny game five or six. Karl Malone had literally no lift in his legs because of an injury (I'm pretty sure they said ankle, which was unrelated to the knee injury he suffered in the REG SEA. Don't quote me on that though). He couldn't jump to get rebounds (literally, the man couldn't jump more than a foot off the ground, if that). That was through the Western Conference playoffs. I'm not talking about the Finals injury that prevented him from playing.

To be honest, I didn't even remember that injury. I remember Malone playing great post defense and passing the ball extremely well. Malone was perfect for the synergy of that team because he connected with Kobe so well on the pick-n-roll and he also connected with Shaq with hi-lows, interior passing, and spreading the floor with his mid-range shot.



Gilmore Fan...I have absolutely no problem with your reasoning regarding Duncan's playoff losses. In many of them, he played well individually, which is all you can ask for. I also appreciate the context you brought, noting how poorly key shooters shot and how defenses played the Spurs.

However, you need to give that same treatment to other players. That means no "Magic failed in 1990." Magic's team may have lost to a possibly inferior team, but that doesn't mean he played poorly. Just because Karl Malone lost in a certain round to a non-contender doesn't mean he should be blamed if he individually performed.

[An Unbiased Fan]

Ugh, "unbiased fan". Of course Malone didn't shut down Duncan, if you actually read my posts you'd know that wasn't what was being said.

And the # of regular season wins doesn't necessarily indicate who the better team is. The Lakers, much like many past champs, were coasting in the regular season (they had injuries too), and waiting to ramp it up in the regular season. It's like saying the Bulls and Spurs were the favourites to win it all this year, because they had the best overall records. absurd.

The Lakers weren't defending champs in 04', and the Mavs weren't defending champs in 06', the SPURS were, so what's your point?

By your logic, wouldn't the Spurs have also been waiting "to ramp it up" in the playoffs too....

[GilmoreFan]

However, you need to give that same treatment to other players. That means no "Magic failed in 1990." Magic's team may have lost to a possibly inferior team, but that doesn't mean he played poorly. Just because Karl Malone lost in a certain round to a non-contender doesn't mean he should be blamed if he individually performed.

Well, if you want to explain game by game how Magic's team let him down, go for it. You have to be able to back it up, like I did. I assume you concede 81 and 86 were horrendous failures.

As for unbiased fan, why bother replying, nobody takes him seriously anyway (yes, only "defending champs" ramp it up in the playoffs, not say... Veteran teams, like the 2010 Celtics who sure didn't look like favourites in the regular season. Yawn).

[An Unbiased Fan]

As for unbiased fan, why bother replying, nobody takes him seriously anyway (yes, only "defending champs" ramp it up in the playoffs, not say... Veteran teams, like the 2010 Celtics who sure didn't look like favourites in the regular season. Yawn).

It's always funny when people have no response to an argument. They always go with the "why bother replying" comeback.

I mean really. If you're going to make the assertion that Duncan had a perfect record, and other guys had "blatant failures", then you need to back it up. You're giving all the credit to Duncan when it comes to team success, and none of the blame for team defeats.

[Fencer reregistered]

Kobe's awesome point totals would sway me more if it weren't for the awesome numbers of shot attempts that accompanied them. Plus all the pouting/whining stuff. Plus I noticed that his favorite defensive assignment against the Celtics was Rondo, a guy who doesn't shoot very well. And while Ray Allen did get shut down last time around, it was only after a Ron Artest mugging, when he did a poor job of shaking off the resulting injury.

If I don't vote Kobe in the top 10, I'll vote him close to there. I think he's the first perimeter player I'll go for after Jordan, Magic, and Bird. But despite his resume I don't think he and his single MVP selection are in the discussion yet.

[Fencer reregistered]

By the way -- I'd like to lobby AGAINST nominating Wade any time soon. He just hasn't had that many total great & good seasons yet, partly because his career is still underway and partly because of injury.

[An Unbiased Fan]

Kobe's awesome point totals would sway me more if it weren't for the awesome numbers of shot attempts that accompanied them. Plus all the pouting/whining stuff. Plus I noticed that his favorite defensive assignment against the Celtics was Rondo, a guy who doesn't shoot very well. And while Ray Allen did get shut down last time around, it was only after a Ron Artest mugging, when he did a poor job of shaking off the resulting injury.

To be fair, Kobe's TS% is very efficient for a volume scorer. And he scored at rates not seen since Wilt, and in a totally different pace era.

Also, Kobe's defense was very important, because Rondo was the driving force for Boston's offense, and a huge problem in the earlier rounds. LA was more worried about him than Allen.

[GilmoreFan]

Everyone else seems to get it unbiased fan... maybe you should go try again.

[Dr Positivity]

By the way -- I'd like to lobby AGAINST nominating Wade any time soon. He just hasn't had that many total great & good seasons yet, partly because his career is still underway and partly because of injury.

I have West, Oscar, KG as a tier above everyone on the available for nominations right now. After that the next guys who made the old top 100 were Havlicek, Pettit, Robinson, Frazier, Baylor. The gap from West/Oscar to them is a serious buffalo killing cliff (though LBJ, Wade and Dirk probably sneak in there and lessen the fall)

[Fencer reregistered]

Kobe's awesome point totals would sway me more if it weren't for the awesome numbers of shot attempts that accompanied them. Plus all the pouting/whining stuff. Plus I noticed that his favorite defensive assignment against the Celtics was Rondo, a guy who doesn't shoot very well. And while Ray Allen did get shut down last time around, it was only after a Ron Artest mugging, when he did a poor job of shaking off the resulting injury.

To be fair, Kobe's TS% is very efficient for a volume scorer. And he scored at rates not seen since Wilt, and in a totally different pace era.

Also, Kobe's defense was very important, because Rondo was the driving force for Boston's offense, and a huge problem in the earlier rounds. LA was more worried about him than Allen.

Maybe it's because I'm a Celtics fan, but I'm just not that impressed by volume scoring. Perhaps I should give more credence to the guys who scored a bit inefficiently, but did so through waves of defenders -- as long as their teams won so much that I'm persuaded they were making good decisions in their shot selection ...

... oh wait.

[GilmoreFan]

You shouldn't exaggerate the difference between D.Rob and KG. I have KG ahead (which would be heresy 3 years ago), but only due to longevity. D.Rob had the clearly superior peak.

[ronnymac2]

However, you need to give that same treatment to other players. That means no "Magic failed in 1990." Magic's team may have lost to a possibly inferior team, but that doesn't mean he played poorly. Just because Karl Malone lost in a certain round to a non-contender doesn't mean he should be blamed if he individually performed.

Well, if you want to explain game by game how Magic's team let him down, go for it. You have to be able to back it up, like I did. I assume you concede 81 and 86 were horrendous failures.

IIRC, I don't need to concede anything in 1986. I'm pretty sure Magic was dominant individually. I'll have to look at that RPOY thread again.

Regarding 1990 though...I'm not even sure why you think the Lakers shouldn't have lost that series. It wasn't a gimme. The Lakers had the second best SRS in the league that year. Guess who was first? The Phoenix Suns, the team in the same division as the Lakers (so they were facing similar opponents). The Suns had two all-nba second team players. Chambers and KJ were both at their peak this season. Magic somehow pulled that team, which saw the departure of KAJ (old as he was in '89, he was still 7'2 and serviceable), to 63 victories in the REG SEA.

That L.A. team is flawed. Divac only played 20 minutes per game and there was no Perkins. The team played 35-year-old Thompson at C. That team was essentially as much of a perimeter team as PHX was at that point, except Chambers could produce at a higher volume than James Worthy as a frontcourt scorer.

The only thing I'm 100 percent sure about is that Magic had two 40 point games in that series against PHX. His stats during that year's playoffs are insane (25/12/6 on nearly 60 percent TS) though obviously that also counts the first round series, so it doesn't show us what happened in each series or game by game.

What exactly is your evidence that A.) The Lakers were upset by a clearly inferior team B.) Magic performed poorly individually?

[ronnymac2]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NWa064Uogl8[/youtube]

Go a minute and a half in. Doug Collins explains during a timeout how Magic was carrying the team, yet his guys weren't giving him much help in the second half.

[ronnymac2]

http://www.nytimes.com/1990/05/16/sports/suns-rally-to-beat-lakers-earning-trip-to-west-final.html?scp=7&sq=1990%20suns%20lakers&st=cse

Magic scored 43 points in the game five.


Here, watch this.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oc_vUx5DXZI&feature=related[/youtube]


Hornacek averaged 26 ppg in games 3 and 4 on 55 percent shooting.

Remember how I said L.A. had a problem at C. Well, watch Mark West's numbers there. 14.5/9.5/4.5 on 13/14 shooting in games 3 and 4. Doug Collins mentioned a big game 1.

Collins also mentioned how L.A.'s defense sucked, and how Byron Scott struggled in the games in PHX. He averaged 5.5 points per game in games 3 and 4.

[GilmoreFan]

I can be brought around to the view Magic was let down by his team in 1990, though from memory (and a quick glance at the team stats) I'm not seeing it, but I'd like to hear the argument. I'm pretty locked into 81 and 86 being failures.

Here's a rough overview of my perspective on these sorts of things.
1) Of course we shouldn't sub team performance for individual performance (nods to unbiased fan)
2) But at the same time, we need to go deeper than "player X posted big stats, so he did his job". By that logic World B.Free was doing his job, because he posted big stats (Wilt too). There's more to the analysis than that. In the case of Duncan in 06 you can see how his big stats had a huge impact on helping the team. In addition, we can see that he lost to a team who was at least as talented, and much better balanced (they weren't starting 3 swing men and a PG next to their star PF), and he in fact almost won, going down in OT in game 7 due to other players making boneheaded plays. I see all those things together (combined with my observations from watching the series) and I think "ok, fair enough".
3) I look at the Jazz losing to the 89 Warriors and say "hang on, Stockton and Malone posted big stats, but a) they were playing a fast paced no defense team, so that's hardly surprising, b) the Jazz had the best players 1-6 on the Warriors (sometimes by huge margins), and the Warriors barely played anyone else, 3) the Jazz had a huge size mismatch on the Warriors, 4) the Jazz had a coaching advantage, 5) Mullin and Mitch didn't even shoot well from the 3pt line, and 6) the games were not close, the Warriors basically ran all over the Jazz. I look at that and say "ok, something doesn't add up there, you can't just give those 2 a pass, that was a huge let down".

To me the Lakers in 1990 looks alot closer to the 89 Jazz choke job than it does to the 06 Spurs. The Lakers had a similarly talented support cast (I realise KJ and Chambers are underrated by some people, but Worthy was [undeservedly] a top 50 all time player, a 7 time all-star, and an all-nba 3rd teamer, and it's not like the Lakers had nobody else). They lost pretty convincingly, and they had the veteran side, with by far and away the best player.

I am open to the arguments, but "Magic had some big statistical games" isn't really doing it for me by itself. I'm impressed by Duncan's big games because I watched the series, and my memory backs up all the stats, that he was awesome. Saying "Magic scored 40 twice" isn't really the same... I can't remember how many bad games Kobe's had where he's scored alot.

[SDChargers#1]

This is where it should really start getting interesting. Unbiased Fan I love Kobe, but I think Magic still has a leg up on him as the greatest Laker of All Time. He accomplished what Kobe has in less years. Plus helped lead his team to 9 finals appearances to Kobe's 7. Kobe is the better scorer and defender. But Magic is the overall better offensive player and rebounder, and quite possibly the most versatile player to ever play the game (played center in the Finals as a rookie).

Anyway, my vote for #4 is going to be for Earvin "Magic" Johnson. Magic led some of the greatest offenses of all time, and is quite easily the greatest point guard to ever play the game. He led the Lakers to 9 finals appearances in 11 years and won 5 titles. He may be the greatest passer to ever live (certainly in the top 3 with Stockton and Nash), and the greatest rebounding point guard of all time. Magic also had some absolutely legendary performances in the playoffs.

Magic's drawbacks are essentially that he played very little defense (probably the worst out of all the guys in the top 10) and had stacked teams. But make no mistake that Magic was the motor that made those Showtime Machines run, and his offense clearly makes up for his defense (in much the same way that Russell's defense makes up for his offense).

Magic had the unfortunate luck to contract HIV and have to retire early. I don't do "what ifs" when it comes to who is the greatest, but it certainly would have been interesting to see Magic play out his whole career.

Official Vote: Magic Johnson
Nomination: Jerry West

[ronnymac2]

I'm not sure who to vote for yet, but I'll play Diesel's Advocate in this thread...


Shaquille O'Neal had one of the better peaks in NBA history. Conservatively, I'd say his peak was in the top 90th percentile. I'm being VERY conservative there.

I want to talk about longevity first though.


Shaq averaged 20 ppg and 10 rpg for 13 consecutive season, which is an NBA record.

Shaq received his first all-nba selection in 1994, his second year in the league. He was all-nba third team. 15 years later, he was again named to the all-nba third team.

Shaq played 19 seasons in the NBA. He played in 1207 games, which is 27th all-time. He was very good to elite in 15 different seasons. And just this past season, despite being the oldest player in the league and playing in limited time, he was part of one of the best five-man units in the league. He was no great player, but even in his final season, he still proved he could contribute when he was on the court.

Starting in 1995 and ending in 2006, Shaq's teams either won titles (4), lost to Conference Champions (who were NBA runners-up) (3), or lost to champions (5).

Shaq won his first field goal percentage title in 1994. In 2006, he tied Wilt Chamberlain by winning his ninth field goal percentage title, averaging 20 ppg. Wilt curbed his field goal attempts and scoring down at the end of his career, averaging 14.8 ppg in 1972 and 13.2 ppg in 1973, the last years in which he won the field goal percentage title.

Shaq now owns the record for most field goal percentage titles in NBA history (10) after winning it again in 2009 at the age of 36. He averaged 17.8 ppg that season.

Shaq is a 15-time all-star. Remember, Shaq, as well as other all-time greats who played in 1999, are at a disadvantage since there was no all-star game in '99. That goes for Duncan, Garnett, Kobe...and when we get to them, Kidd, Payton, etc. Karl Malone and David Robinson, too.

Shaq is also pretty high on some important career totals lists, including scoring (5th all-time), rebounding (13th all-time), and blocks (8th all-time).


That is incredible longevity.

I'll talk about his playoff performances and peak/prime in a later post.

[ronnymac2]

Magic's drawbacks are essentially that he played very little defense (probably the worst out of all the guys in the top 10) and had stacked teams. But make no mistake that Magic was the motor that made those Showtime Machines run, and his offense clearly makes up for his defense (in much the same way that Russell's defense makes up for his offense).

Magic wasn't a poor defender, especially early in his career. In 1982, he was, besides KAJ, the key to the Lakers trapping defense. He wasn't a great defensive player, but he wasn't poor.

[GilmoreFan]

Shaq was a great player... when he wanted to be. His big numbers and longevity are awesome, but they mask the fact he really underachieved on where he should have been. Be honest Ronnymac, put Duncan in place on Shaq from 98-11. How many titles does Duncan win? Yeh, they win almost every year... that's not meant as a direct comparison btw, I realise Shaq was a shadow of himself for the latter part of that period. What it is meant to illustrate is that with the same sort of good fortune Shaq had for team mates, alot of people would be discussing Duncan v.s Russell for the #2 spot, because of the sheer number of rings he would have had.

Shaq could play like a DPOY... for small stretches, when he felt like it, when he was in shape... but overall Duncan was far more important and impactful on D.

I go off the careers they actually had, and the careers they actually had tell me Duncan was the more impactful player, and made better use of his great talent over a longer period, even if Shaq was technically better during his short, short peak, and even if Shaq maintained his prime for longer (though all the injuries during that prime kind of hurt the longevity argument too).

[Warspite]

Wilt
Oscar

I cant think of any player who adapted and changed his game to fit his team.

He was asked to score more PPG than any player ever had or ever could. NP

He was asked to be a high post PG and setup man. NP

He was asked to be a def force and outlet passer. NP

The mans resume is much greater than player left on this list. He doesnt fit into some preconcieved notions and cookie cutter image and so he as detractors. What hurts Wilt the most is that whathe did was the impossible so his accomplishments arent believed.

Hes the GOAT rebounder and GOAT scorer. He led the NBA in assists one yr. He was the best player on what many consider the 2 best teams to ever play. He is the only man who can say that he played Bill Russells Celtics at there height and Russell was healthy and beat them.

The reason WIlt isnt in your top 5 is because he didnt beat Russell and his Celtics more. So why dont you have Bob Pettit in your top10? Nobody beat the Celtics so I dont hold it against WIlt or West or Oscar. In fact Wilt did beat the Celtics and IMHO thats a greater accomplishment than some of these players who beat some pretty mediocre teams.

No Wilt isnt perfect but hes better than everyone else and thats good enough.