I tend to think I also like Barry more than most. He wasn't particularly efficient (around league average at his peak), but he was a remarkable passer, and IMO not ball dominant to the extent that he's portrayed. He's
shot dominant if that's a thing(?), but I never saw him kill the shot clock, and waste possessions. He did a lot of work coming off screens, moving off the ball, and quick hitting pull ups with range. I actually remember counting the # of times Barry touched the ball in G3 of the 75 Finals. Unfortunately, I lost that information, but through 72 possessions (end of the 3rd), Barry TOUCHED the ball 36 times (not held, just rather had a hand on the ball). And only 2-5 of those possessions were him holding the ball longer than 3-5 seconds, with a few of them being simply end of the quarter isolation plays. And, I'm not going to say he was very good defensively, but he was active, got his hands on the ball a lot, and was pulling nearly 3 steals for a team that was top 5 in DRTG.
He was also very good in the playoffs against very good defensive teams; a Sonics team (7th in DRTG), Bulls team (2nd in DRTG), and Bullets team that was #1 in DRTG. Overall 28/5/6 on .505 TS% in the post season (in the playoffs that year, the average TS% was .501).
I can definitely see where those
very light Bird comparisons come from.
Gilmore was also a monster in '75. They won predominately because of their defense, and that was spearheaded by Gilmore (they also did have Wil Jones [the "Erving" stopper, I read somewhere] and Ted McClain a good defender as well). He was also ridiculously efficient, and absolutely dominated the Pacers in the ABA Finals, especially on the boards (where the Colonels killed him - and Gilmore pulling down 21 boards per game). It might be worth mentioning; however, that the teams Gilmore faced in that post-season were not too impressive (didn't face the Nets or Nuggets). It's no fault of his, and they were dominant in the regular season, but something to entertain. In general, I'm not a huge Gilmore fan, because I feel his NBA play was very overrated, but at his peak, an argument for him coming up rather soon should be building. I think a comparison between him and Dwight would be very interesting.
Count me in as a huge Penny fan as well. But we also have to start considering guys like Frazier or the Glove, I'd think.
RE: McGrady and Yao
I'm definitely a Rockets fan, that had the misfortune of signing up with a TMac moniker back in 06
Now it's time for Linsanity/Asik/rookies show!
My point was that McGrady had impact, and when the Rockets had him in the lineup, they were very good, and when he wasn't, they were absolute garbage. The Rockets couldn't do anything offensively, because there were no creators, nor any perimeter scoring. Honestly, there are very few guys during those seasons that could have replicated the same sort of role McGrady had on that team. I don't deny an intangibles aspect lacking (especially in an all time sense; though I'm not sure how much I buy it affecting his teams to an extent where they truly under-performed). I just thought bringing up '09 is completely irrelevant, and in '08, the Rockets with Adelman and McGrady went on a 22 game win streak, including 12 of those games without Yao. McGrady's exit had more to do with injuries, and rubbing the fans the wrong way than his "not buying" into Adelman's system, IMO. In fact, I don't know how many people remember it, but McGrady was the only player that was truly excelling in Adelman's system to start the season, he was playing less off the ball, and started the season on fire - then he got injured against the Lakers, and after he returned, his efficiency went completely down the drain (especially after the win streak).
Anyways, from what I understood about your previous post, you were insinuating that McGrady had "empty stats." And when those records w/ and w/out TMac are so staggering, I don't see how anyone could make that argument, especially considering how TMac stepped up his game when Yao went out annually with his injury (Deke was very good, but he wasn't Yao for the Rockets to have a .600+% without him). I also don't get the JVG was lucky to have Yao having a remarkable work ethic saving him from getting fired comment..what does that mean (not disagreeing, just don't understand)?
As for Yao, I do think he should be in the Top 50 peaks, definitely. I just struggle to think of which year. I'd agree with '07 as the season which he was the most dominant, but there's the whole missed game factor, and the overlooked fact that Yao under-performed in that post-season. He couldn't take advantage of Okur guarding him, and many of those times were in single coverage (though there was a fair share of double teams as well). And defensively, Utah was just a bad matchup, he couldn't cover Okur defensively because of the range, and was forced to guard Boozer, who just murdered the Rockets on the pick and roll. I think that's the main season where you could point at the Rockets underperforming, where both McGrady/Yao had less than stellar series and lost G7 at home ('05, Yao wasn't as good, '06 everyone was injured, '08 Yao was injured in the post-season, and '09 McGrady declined completely). I think that definitely has to be a factor when we're considering the top 50 peaks of ALL-TIME.
I actually like '09 alot, he was more the clear star of that team, was ridiculously efficient, and has always been very underrated as an anchor on defense. He got injured in the second round (:( ), and while I've been a huge "Yao gets beat by the front FAR too much" guy, he still drew ALOT of attention which freed up a lot of jumpshots for guys like Scola in that Blazers series. It's worth mentioning he set the tone for that series too, when the Blazers came out saying they'd single cover Yao with Pryz, and Yao torched the Blazers so bad in that first half, that strategy was literally killed after only two quarters.
I'm not sure where I'd have him as I haven't really looked at my list in depth, but somewhere around 35-40 on an initial look basis could seem like a good spot.
